Hi Stan, I have opened the minor PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/15127 to fix publishing the dependency. Once discussed and merged in trunk, I'll update the 3.7 branch as well.
Regards, Apoorv Mittal +44 7721681581 On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 12:49 PM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote: > We found a blocker for 3.7: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-16077 > > Already having a PR under review to fix it. > > > -Matthias > > On 1/3/24 10:43 AM, Stanislav Kozlovski wrote: > > Hey all, happy new year. > > > > Thanks for the heads up Almog. Makes sense. > > > > To give an update - I haven't been able to resolve the gradlewAll publish > > failure, and as such haven't been able to release an RC. > > As a minor barrier, I have to also update the year in the NOTICE file, > > otherwise the release script won't let me continue - > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/15111 > > > > Me and Apoorv synced offline and ran a few tests to debug the issue > > regarding the clients build. I successfully executed `publish` when > > pointing toward a custom jfrog repo with both JDK 8 and 17. Inspecting > the > > debug logs, the task that previously failed > > `:clients:publishMavenJavaPublicationToMavenRepository'` passed > > successfully. Here's a sample of the logs - > > > https://gist.github.com/stanislavkozlovski/841060cb467ec1d179cc9f293c8702e7 > > > > Having read the release.py script a few times, I am not able to see what > is > > different in the setup there. It simply clones the repo anew, gets the > 3.7 > > branch and runs the same command. > > > > At this point, I am contemplating pushing a commit to 3.7 that modifies > the > > release.py file that enables debug on the command: > > diff --git a/release.py b/release.py > > index 43c5809861..e299e10e74 100755 > > --- a/release.py > > +++ b/release.py > > @@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ with > > open(os.path.expanduser("~/.gradle/gradle.properties")) as f: > > contents = f.read() > > if not user_ok("Going to build and upload mvn artifacts based on these > > settings:\n" + contents + '\nOK (y/n)?: '): > > fail("Retry again later") > > -cmd("Building and uploading archives", "./gradlewAll publish", > > cwd=kafka_dir, env=jdk8_env, shell=True) > > +cmd("Building and uploading archives", "./gradlewAll publish --debug", > > cwd=kafka_dir, env=jdk8_env, shell=True) > > cmd("Building and uploading archives", "mvn deploy -Pgpg-signing", > > cwd=streams_quickstart_dir, env=jdk8_env, shell=True) > > > > release_notification_props = { 'release_version': release_version, > > (END) > > > > and continuing to debug through that. > > > > Since the release.py script grabs a new copy of origin, we have to modify > > upstream. An alternative is for me to use my local github Kafka repo, but > > that may result in the script pushing a build of that into the remote > > servers. > > > > On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 8:17 PM Almog Gavra <almog.ga...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> Hello Stan, > >> > >> I wanted to give you a heads up that > >> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/15073 ( > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-16046) was identified as a > >> blocker regression and should be merged to trunk by EOD. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Almog > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 4:20 AM Stanislav Kozlovski > >> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Apoorv, > >>> > >>> Thanks for taking ownership and looking into this! One more caveat is > >> that > >>> I believe this first publish is ran with JDK 8, as the release.py runs > >> with > >>> both JDK 8 and (if I recall correctly) 17 versions. This seems to fail > on > >>> the first one - so JDK 8. > >>> Not sure if that is related in any way. And I'm also not sure if it > >> should > >>> be kafka-clients or just clients. > >>> > >>> On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 10:48 AM Apoorv Mittal < > apoorvmitta...@gmail.com > >>> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Stan, > >>>> Thanks for looking into the release. I worked with `./gradlewAll > >>>> publishToMavenLocal` which generates the respective > `kafka-clients.jar` > >>>> and deploys to maven local, I believed that `./gradlewAll publish` > >> should > >>>> just publish the artifacts to remote repository and hence should > always > >>>> work as jars successfully gets deployed to local maven. > >>>> > >>>> Though now I set up the remote private maven repository for myself (on > >>>> jfrog) and tried `./gradlewAll publish` on the 3.7 branch and > >>>> successfully completed the build with all artifacts uploaded to the > >>> remote > >>>> repository. What seems strange to me is the error you mentioned in the > >>>> previous email regarding the reference of the clients jar. I suppose > >> the > >>>> reference should be to `kafka-clients.jar` rather than `clients.jar`, > I > >>>> might be missing if something else gets triggered in the release > >>> pipeline. > >>>> Do you think I should set up the remote repository as per the > >>> instructions > >>>> in `release.py` and try running `./release.py` as that might do > >> something > >>>> different, though I suspect that it should? > >>>> > >>>> [image: Screenshot 2023-12-30 at 9.33.42 AM.png] > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> Apoorv Mittal > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Dec 29, 2023 at 2:13 AM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Just to update this thread, everything in KAFKA-14127 is done now. A > >> few > >>>>> tasks got moved to a separate umbrella JIRA. > >>>>> > >>>>> Some folks are going to do more testing, both manual and automated, > in > >>>>> the next week or two. I think this will give us a good indicator of > >>>>> stability and what we need to fix. > >>>>> > >>>>> Right now I'm leaning towards just making it GA since that's how most > >>>>> features work. It's kind of rare for us to do a multi-step rollout > for > >>> new > >>>>> features. > >>>>> > >>>>> best, > >>>>> Colin > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2023, at 03:43, Mickael Maison wrote: > >>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> With the current timeline for 3.7, I tend to agree with Viktor that > >>>>>> JBOD support in KRaft is unlikely to receive the extensive testing > >>>>>> this feature needs before releasing. And that's not counting the > >>>>>> testing tasks left to do in > >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-14127. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'm fine sticking to the current 3.7 timeline but I'd err on the > >> safe > >>>>>> side and mark JBOD as early access to avoid major issues. Kafka is > >>>>>> known for its robustness and resiliency and we certainly don't want > >> to > >>>>>> lose the trust we gained over years. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> Mickael > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 12:24 AM Ismael Juma <m...@ismaeljuma.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Viktor, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Extending the code freeze doesn't help stabilize things. If we have > >>>>>>> important bugs for JBOD, we should mark those as blockers and we'll > >>>>> wait > >>>>>>> until they are fixed if the fixes won't take too long (as usual). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Ismael > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 11:58 AM Viktor Somogyi-Vass > >>>>>>> <viktor.somo...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi all, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I was wondering what people think about extending the code freeze > >>>>> date to > >>>>>>>> early January? > >>>>>>>> The reason I'm asking is that there are still a couple of testing > >>>>> gaps in > >>>>>>>> JBOD (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-14127) which I > >>>>> think is > >>>>>>>> very important to finish to ensure a high quality release (after > >>> all > >>>>> this > >>>>>>>> supposed to be the last 3.x) and secondly the year end holidays > >> for > >>>>> many > >>>>>>>> people are coming fast, which means we'll likely have less people > >>>>> working > >>>>>>>> on testing and validation. In my opinion it would strengthen the > >>>>> release if > >>>>>>>> we could spend a week in January to really finish off JBOD and > >> do a > >>>>> 2 week > >>>>>>>> stabilization. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> What do you all think? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>> Viktor > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 2:59 PM Stanislav Kozlovski > >>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hey! > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Just notifying everybody on this thread that I have cut the 3.7 > >>>>> branch > >>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>> sent a new email thread titled "New Release Branch 3.7" to the > >>>>> mailing > >>>>>>>> list > >>>>>>>>> < > >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/4j87m12fm3bgq01fgphtkfb41s56w6hh > >>>>>> . > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 11:10 AM Stanislav Kozlovski < > >>>>>>>>> stanis...@confluent.io> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hello again, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Time is flying by! It is feature freeze day! > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> By today, we expect to have major features merged and to > >> begin > >>>>> working > >>>>>>>> on > >>>>>>>>>> their stabilisation. Minor features should have PRs. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I am planning to cut the release branch soon - on Monday EU > >>>>> daytime. > >>>>>>>> When > >>>>>>>>>> I do that, I will create a new e-mail thread titled "New > >>> release > >>>>> branch > >>>>>>>>>> 3.7.0" to notify you, so be on the lookout for that. I will > >>> also > >>>>> notify > >>>>>>>>>> this thread. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Thank you for your contributions. Let's get this release > >>> shipped! > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 6:11 PM Stanislav Kozlovski < > >>>>>>>>>> stanis...@confluent.io> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Hey all, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> The KIP Freeze has passed. I count 31 KIPs that will be > >> going > >>>>> into the > >>>>>>>>>>> 3.7 Release. Thank you all for your hard work! > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> They are the following (some of these were accepted in > >>> previous > >>>>>>>> releases > >>>>>>>>>>> and have minor parts going out, some targeting a Preview > >>>>> release and > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>> rest being fully released as regular.): > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-1000: List Client Metrics Configuration Resources > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-1001: Add CurrentControllerId Metric > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-405: Kafka Tiered Storage > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-580: Exponential Backoff for Kafka Clients > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-714: Client metrics and observability > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-770: Replace "buffered.records.per.partition" & > >>>>>>>>>>> "cache.max.bytes.buffering" with > >>>>>>>>>>> "{statestore.cache}/{input.buffer}.max.bytes" > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-848: The Next Generation of the Consumer Rebalance > >>>>> Protocol > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-858: Handle JBOD broker disk failure in KRaft > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-890: Transactions Server-Side Defense > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-892: Transactional StateStores > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-896: Remove old client protocol API versions in Kafka > >>>>> 4.0 - > >>>>>>>>>>> metrics/request log changes to identify deprecated apis > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-925: Rack aware task assignment in Kafka Streams > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-938: Add more metrics for measuring KRaft performance > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-951 - Leader discovery optimizations for the client > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-954: expand default DSL store configuration to custom > >>>>> types > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-959: Add BooleanConverter to Kafka Connect > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-960: Single-key single-timestamp IQv2 for state > >> stores > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-963: Additional metrics in Tiered Storage > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-968: Support single-key_multi-timestamp Interactive > >>>>> Queries > >>>>>>>>> (IQv2) > >>>>>>>>>>> for Versioned State Stores > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-970: Deprecate and remove Connect's redundant task > >>>>>>>> configurations > >>>>>>>>>>> endpoint > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-975: Docker Image for Apache Kafka > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-976: Cluster-wide dynamic log adjustment for Kafka > >>>>> Connect > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-978: Allow dynamic reloading of certificates with > >>>>> different DN > >>>>>>>> / > >>>>>>>>>>> SANs > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-979: Allow independently stop KRaft processes > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-980: Allow creating connectors in a stopped state > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-985: Add reverseRange and reverseAll query over > >>> kv-store > >>>>> in > >>>>>>>> IQv2 > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-988: Streams Standby Update Listener > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-992: Proposal to introduce IQv2 Query Types: > >>>>>>>> TimestampedKeyQuery > >>>>>>>>>>> and TimestampedRangeQuery > >>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-998: Give ProducerConfig(props, doLog) constructor > >>>>> protected > >>>>>>>>> access > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Notable KIPs that didn't make the Freeze were KIP-977 - it > >>> only > >>>>> got > >>>>>>>> 2/3 > >>>>>>>>>>> votes. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> For the full list and latest source of truth, refer to the > >>>>> Release > >>>>>>>> Plan > >>>>>>>>>>> 3.7.0 Document > >>>>>>>>>>> < > >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Release+Plan+3.7.0 > >>>>>>>>> . > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your contributions once again! > >>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>> Stan > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 2:27 PM Nick Telford < > >>>>> nick.telf...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Stan, > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to propose including KIP-892 in the 3.7 release. > >> The > >>>>> KIP has > >>>>>>>>>>>> been > >>>>>>>>>>>> accepted and I'm just working on rebasing the > >> implementation > >>>>> against > >>>>>>>>>>>> trunk > >>>>>>>>>>>> before I open a PR. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>>>>>> Nick > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 at 11:27, Mayank Shekhar Narula < > >>>>>>>>>>>> mayanks.nar...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Stan > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you include KIP-951 to the 3.7 release plan? All PRs > >>> are > >>>>> merged > >>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> trunk. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 4:05 PM Stanislav Kozlovski > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Friendly reminder to everybody that the KIP Freeze is > >>>>> *exactly 7 > >>>>>>>>> days > >>>>>>>>>>>>> away* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - November 22. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> A KIP must be accepted by this date in order to be > >>>>> considered for > >>>>>>>>>>>> this > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release. Note, any KIP that may not be implemented in > >>>>> time, or > >>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> risks heavily destabilizing the release, should be > >>>>> deferred. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stan > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 3, 2023 at 6:03 AM Sophie Blee-Goldman < > >>>>>>>>>>>>> sop...@responsive.dev> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looks great, thank you! +1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 10:21 AM David Jacot > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <dja...@confluent.io.invalid > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 from me as well. Thanks, Stan! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> David > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 6:04 PM Ismael Juma < > >>>>>>>> m...@ismaeljuma.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Stanislav, +1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ismael > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 7:01 AM Stanislav > >> Kozlovski > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Given the discussion here and the lack of any > >>>>> pushback, I > >>>>>>>>>>>> have > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changed > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dates of the release: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KIP Freeze - *November 22 *(moved 4 days > >> later) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Feature Freeze - *December 6 *(moved 2 days > >>>>> earlier) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Code Freeze - *December 20* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If anyone has any thoughts against this > >> proposal > >>> - > >>>>> please > >>>>>>>>>>>> let me > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would be good to settle on this early. These > >> will > >>>>> be the > >>>>>>>>>>>> dates > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we're > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 12:15 AM Sophie > >>>>> Blee-Goldman < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sop...@responsive.dev> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the response and explanations -- I > >>>>> think the > >>>>>>>>>>>> main > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> question > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was whether we intended to permanently > >> increase > >>>>> the KF > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>> FF > >>>>>>>>>>>>> gap > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> historical 1 week to 3 weeks? Maybe this was > >> a > >>>>>>>> conscious > >>>>>>>>>>>>> decision > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> missed the memo, hopefully someone else can > >>>>> chime in > >>>>>>>>>>>> here. I'm > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> all > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> additional though. And looking around at some > >>> of > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> recent > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems like we haven't been consistently > >>>>> following the > >>>>>>>>>>>> "usual" > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> schedule > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> since > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the 2.x releases. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyways, my main concern was making sure to > >>>>> leave a > >>>>>>>> full > >>>>>>>>> 2 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> weeks > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature freeze and code freeze, so I'm > >>> generally > >>>>> happy > >>>>>>>>>>>> with the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> new > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposal. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Although I would still prefer to have the KIP > >>>>> freeze > >>>>>>>> fall > >>>>>>>>>>>> on a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ismael actually brought up the same thing > >>> during > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> 3.5.0 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> planning, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so I'll just refer to his explanation for > >> this: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We typically choose a Wednesday for the > >> various > >>>>> freeze > >>>>>>>>>>>> dates - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> often 1-2 day slips and it's better if that > >>>>> doesn't > >>>>>>>>>>>> require > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> working through the weekend. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (From this mailing list thread > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/dv1rym2jkf0141sfsbkws8ckkzw7st5h > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for driving the release! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sophie > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 8:13 AM Stanislav > >>>>> Kozlovski > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the thorough response, Sophie. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Added to the "Future Release Plan" > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Why is the KIP freeze deadline on a > >>>>> Saturday? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was simply added as a starting point - > >>>>> around 30 > >>>>>>>>> days > >>>>>>>>>>>> from > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> announcement. We can move it earlier to the > >>>>> 15th of > >>>>>>>>>>>> November, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> but > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinking is later is better with these > >> things > >>>>> - it's > >>>>>>>>>>>> already > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aggressive > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough. e.g given the choice of Nov 15 vs > >> Nov > >>>>> 18, I > >>>>>>>>> don't > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> necessarily > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strong reason to choose 15. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If people feel strongly about this, to make > >>> up > >>>>> for > >>>>>>>>> this, > >>>>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eat > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the KF-FF time as I'll touch upon later, > >> and > >>>>> move FF > >>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>> few > >>>>>>>>>>>>> days > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> earlier > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> land on a Wednesday. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This reduces the time one has to get their > >>>>> feature > >>>>>>>>>>>> complete > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> after > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> KF, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allows for longer time to a KIP accepted, > >> so > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>> KF-FF > >>>>>>>>>>>> gap > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> made > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when developing the feature in parallel. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> , this makes it easy for everyone to > >>>>> remember when > >>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>> next > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deadline > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so they can make sure to get everything in > >> on > >>>>> time. I > >>>>>>>>>>>> worry > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> varying > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this will catch people off guard. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't see much value in optimizing the > >>> dates > >>>>> for > >>>>>>>> ease > >>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> memory - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> besides > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the KIP Freeze (which is the base date), > >>> there > >>>>> are > >>>>>>>> only > >>>>>>>>>>>> two > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> more > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dates > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remember that are on the wiki. More > >>>>> importantly, we > >>>>>>>>> have > >>>>>>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plethora > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tools that can be used to set up reminders > >> - > >>>>> so a > >>>>>>>>>>>> contributor > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> necessarily need to remember anything if > >>>>> they're > >>>>>>>>> serious > >>>>>>>>>>>>> about > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> getting > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their feature in. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Is there a particular reason for > >> having > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> feature > >>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> almost > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> full 3 weeks from the KIP freeze? ... > >> having > >>> 3 > >>>>> weeks > >>>>>>>>>>>> between > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> KIP > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature freeze (which are > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usually separated by just a single week)? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was going off the last two releases, > >> which > >>>>> had *20 > >>>>>>>>>>>> days* > >>>>>>>>>>>>> (~3 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weeks) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between KF & FF. Here are their dates: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - AK 3.5 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KF: 22 March > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - FF: 12 April > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - (20 days after) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - CF: 26 April > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - (14 days after) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Release: 15 June > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - 50 days after CF > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - AK 3.6 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KF: 26 July > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - FF: 16 Aug > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - (20 days after) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - CF: 30 Aug > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - (14 days after) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Release: 11 October > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - 42 days after CF > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know the precise reasoning for > >>>>> extending the > >>>>>>>>>>>> time, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> nor > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most appropriate time - but having talked > >>>>> offline to > >>>>>>>>> some > >>>>>>>>>>>>> folks > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prior > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this discussion, it seemed reasonable. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your proposal uses an aggressive 1-week gap > >>>>> between > >>>>>>>>> both, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> which > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> quite > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the jump from the previous 3 weeks. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps someone with more direct experience > >>> in > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>> recent can > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chime > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here. Both for the reasoning for the > >>> extension > >>>>> from > >>>>>>>> 1w > >>>>>>>>>>>> to 3w > >>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> last > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, and how they feel about reducing > >>> this > >>>>>>>> range. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. On the other hand, we usually have a > >>> full > >>>>> two > >>>>>>>>> weeks > >>>>>>>>>>>> from > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze deadline to the code freeze but with > >>>>> the given > >>>>>>>>>>>>> schedule > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only be a week and a half. Given how > >>> important > >>>>> this > >>>>>>>>>>>> period is > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> testing > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and stabilizing the release, and how vital > >>>>> this is > >>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> uncovering > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blockers > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that would have delayed the release > >>> deadline, I > >>>>>>>> really > >>>>>>>>>>>> think > >>>>>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintain the two-week gap (at a minimum) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is a fair point. At the end of the > >> day, > >>>>> we have > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>> take > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> time > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> either one of the 3 ranges (now - KF; > >> KF-FF; > >>>>> FF-CF;) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *It sounds fair to me to take out half a > >> week > >>>>> from > >>>>>>>>> KF-FF > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> add > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FF-CF*. e.g: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KF=Nov 18 (Sat) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - FF=Dec 6 (Wed) 2.5w after > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - CF=Dec 20 (Wed) 2w after > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How do others feel about this? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to throw a suggestion out there, if > >> we > >>>>> want to > >>>>>>>>>>>> avoid > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the winter holidays while still making up > >> for > >>>>>>>> slipping > >>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what about something like this: ... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at the last 2 releases, they both > >> had > >>>>> a full > >>>>>>>>>>>> month > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> KIP > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Freeze and Code Freeze to finish > >>>>> contributions. Your > >>>>>>>>>>>> proposal > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> goes > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> back > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a more aggressive 3 weeks e2e time. All > >> else > >>>>> equal, > >>>>>>>> if > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> date > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be kept as early January, I would prefer > >>> to > >>>>> opt > >>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> more > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accommodative 4-week period. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that historically, we have set all > >> the > >>>>>>>> deadlines > >>>>>>>>>>>> on a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when in doubt erred on the side of an > >> earlier > >>>>>>>> deadline > >>>>>>>>>>>> ... We > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> often have, allowed things to come in late > >>>>> between > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deadline and the following Friday, but only > >>> on > >>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>> case-by-case > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This makes sense to me. The proposal I put > >>>>> above puts > >>>>>>>>>>>> the two > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> critical > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dates (FF & CF) on Wed to allow for this > >>>>> flexibility > >>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>> case > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 12:40 AM Sophie > >>>>> Blee-Goldman > >>>>>>>> < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sop...@responsive.dev> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually I have a few questions about the > >>>>> schedule: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Why is the KIP freeze deadline on a > >>>>> Saturday? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Traditionally > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> has > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been on a Wednesday, which is nice > >> because > >>>>> it gives > >>>>>>>>>>>> people > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> until > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Monday > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kick off the vote and give people a full > >> 3 > >>>>> working > >>>>>>>>>>>> days to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> review > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vote > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on it. Also, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Why are the subsequent deadlines on > >>>>> different > >>>>>>>> days > >>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Usually > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we aim to have the freeze deadlines > >>>>> separated by an > >>>>>>>>>>>> integer > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> number > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weeks. Besides just being a consequence > >> of > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> typical > >>>>>>>>>>>> 1/2 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> week > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separation > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between freeze dates, this makes it easy > >>> for > >>>>>>>> everyone > >>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remember > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next deadline is so they can make sure to > >>> get > >>>>>>>>>>>> everything in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worry that varying this will catch people > >>> off > >>>>>>>> guard. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Is there a particular reason for > >> having > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> feature > >>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> almost > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> full > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3 weeks from the KIP freeze? I understand > >>>>> moving > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>> KIP > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deadline > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to account for recent release delays, but > >>>>> aren't we > >>>>>>>>>>>> wasting > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> some > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gained time by having 3 weeks between the > >>>>> KIP and > >>>>>>>>>>>> feature > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (which > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usually separated by just a single week)? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. On the other hand, we usually have a > >>> full > >>>>> two > >>>>>>>>> weeks > >>>>>>>>>>>> from > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze deadline to the code freeze but > >> with > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>> given > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> schedule > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only be a week and a half. Given how > >>>>> important this > >>>>>>>>>>>> period > >>>>>>>>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> testing > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and stabilizing the release, and how > >> vital > >>>>> this is > >>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uncovering > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blockers > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that would have delayed the release > >>>>> deadline, I > >>>>>>>>> really > >>>>>>>>>>>>> think > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maintain the two-week gap (at a minimum) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Note that historically, we have set all > >> the > >>>>>>>> deadlines > >>>>>>>>>>>> on a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when in doubt erred on the side of an > >>> earlier > >>>>>>>>>>>> deadline, to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> encourage > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> folks > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get their work completed and > >> stabilized > >>>>> as soon > >>>>>>>> as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> possible. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> often have, allowed things to come in > >> late > >>>>> between > >>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wednesday > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deadline and the following Friday, but > >> only > >>>>> on a > >>>>>>>>>>>>> case-by-case > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basis. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way the RM has the flexibility to > >> determine > >>>>> what to > >>>>>>>>>>>> allow > >>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be, while still having everyone aim for > >> the > >>>>>>>>> established > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> deadlines. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to throw a suggestion out there, if > >> we > >>>>> want to > >>>>>>>>>>>> avoid > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> running > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> winter holidays while still making up for > >>>>> slipping > >>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>> recent > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about something like this: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> KIP Freeze: Nov 22nd > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feature Freeze: Nov 29th > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Code Freeze: Dec 13th > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We can keep the release target as Jan 3rd > >>> or > >>>>> move > >>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>>>>> up to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dec > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 27th. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Personally, I would just aim to have it > >> as > >>>>> Dec 27th > >>>>>>>>> but > >>>>>>>>>>>>> keep > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stated > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> target as Jan 3rd, to account for > >>> unexpected > >>>>>>>>>>>>> blockers/delays > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> away > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during the winter holidays > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 3:14 PM Sophie > >>>>>>>> Blee-Goldman < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sop...@responsive.dev > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you add the 3.7 plan to the release > >>>>> schedule > >>>>>>>>>>>> page? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (this --> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Future+release+plan > >> ) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 2:27 AM > >> Stanislav > >>>>>>>> Kozlovski > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> > >> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey Chris, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the catch! It was indeed > >>>>> copied and I > >>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sure > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the bullet point, so I kept it. > >> What > >>>>> you say > >>>>>>>>>>>> makes > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sense > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> removed > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also added KIP-976! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2023 at 9:35 PM Chris > >>>>> Egerton < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fearthecel...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Stanislav, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for putting this together! I > >>>>> think the > >>>>>>>>>>>> "Ensure > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> candidates include artifacts for the > >>> new > >>>>>>>> Connect > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test-plugins > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> module" > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> section (which I'm guessing was > >> copied > >>>>> over > >>>>>>>> from > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.6.0 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plan?) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can be removed; we made sure that > >>> those > >>>>>>>>> artifacts > >>>>>>>>>>>> were > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> present > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.6.0, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and I don't anticipate any changes > >>> that > >>>>> would > >>>>>>>>> make > >>>>>>>>>>>>> them > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> likelier > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accidentally dropped in subsequent > >>>>> releases > >>>>>>>> than > >>>>>>>>>>>> any > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> other > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maven > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> artifacts > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we publish. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, can we add KIP-976 ( > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-976%3A+Cluster-wide+dynamic+log+adjustment+for+Kafka+Connect > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to the release plan? The vote thread > >>>>> for it > >>>>>>>>> passed > >>>>>>>>>>>>> last > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> published a complete PR ( > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/14538 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ), > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shouldn't be too difficult to get > >>> things > >>>>>>>> merged > >>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>> time > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.7.0. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Chris > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2023 at 3:26 PM > >>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>>> Kozlovski > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io.invalid> > >>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for letting me drive it, > >>> folks. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've created the 3.7.0 release > >> page > >>>>> here: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Release+Plan+3.7.0 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It outlines the key milestones and > >>>>> important > >>>>>>>>>>>> dates > >>>>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In particular, since the last two > >>>>> releases > >>>>>>>>>>>> slipped > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> their > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> originally > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> targeted release date by taking an > >>>>> average > >>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>> 46 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> days > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freeze > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposed to the minimum which is 14 > >>>>> days), I > >>>>>>>>>>>> pulled > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dates > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> forward > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> try > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and catch up with the original > >>> release > >>>>>>>>> schedule. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can refer to the last release > >>>>> during the > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Christmas > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> holiday > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> season > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kafka 3.4 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Release+Plan+3.4.0 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see sample dates. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The currently proposed dates are: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *KIP Freeze - 18th November > >>>>> *(Saturday) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This is 1 month and four days > >> from > >>>>> now - > >>>>>>>>> rather > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> short - > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> afraid > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the only lever that's easy to pull > >>>>> forward.* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As usual, a KIP must be accepted > >> by > >>>>> this > >>>>>>>> date > >>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>> order > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> considered > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this release. Note, any KIP that > >> may > >>>>> not be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> implemented > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> week, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might destabilize the release, > >>> should > >>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>> deferred. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Feature Freeze - 8th December* > >>>>> (Friday) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *This follows 3 weeks after the > >> KIP > >>>>> Freeze, > >>>>>>>> as > >>>>>>>>>>>> has > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> case > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> latest releases.* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> By this point, we want all major > >>>>> features to > >>>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> merged & > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> working > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on stabilisation. Minor features > >>>>> should have > >>>>>>>>>>>> PRs, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be cut; anything not in this state > >>>>> will be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> automatically > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moved > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release in JIRA > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Code Freeze - 20th December* > >>>>> (Wednesday) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Critically, this is before the > >>>>> holiday > >>>>>>>> season > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ends > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> middle > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the week, to give contributors > >> more > >>>>> time and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> flexibility > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> address > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> last-minute without eating into > >> the > >>>>> time > >>>>>>>>> people > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> usually > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> holidays. It > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> comes 12 days after the Feature > >>>>> Freeze.This > >>>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>>>>>> two > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> days > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shorter > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usual code freeze window. I don't > >>>>> have a > >>>>>>>>> strong > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> opinion > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> am > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> extend it to Friday, or trade off > >> a > >>>>> day/two > >>>>>>>>>>>> with the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> KF<->FF > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> date > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> range.* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Release -* *after January 3rd*. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *It comes after a minimum of two > >>>>> weeks of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> stabilization, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> earliest > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can start releasing is January > >> 3rd. > >>>>> We will > >>>>>>>>>>>> move as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fast > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aim > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> completing it as early in January > >> as > >>>>>>>>> possible.* > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for the initially-populated > >> KIPs > >>>>> in the > >>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plan, I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> did > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I kept 4 KIPs that were mentioned > >> in > >>>>> 3.6, > >>>>>>>>> saying > >>>>>>>>>>>>> they > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> minor > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts finished in 3.7 (as the > >> major > >>>>> ones > >>>>>>>> went > >>>>>>>>>>>> out in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.6) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-405 Tiered Storage > >> mentioned a > >>>>> major > >>>>>>>>> part > >>>>>>>>>>>> went > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> out > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.6 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remainder will come with 3.7 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-890 mentioned Part 1 shipped > >>> in > >>>>> 3.6. I > >>>>>>>>> am > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> assuming > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remainder > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> come in 3.7, and have contacted > >> the > >>>>> author > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>> confirm. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-926 was partially > >> implemented > >>>>> in 3.6. > >>>>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>> am > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> assuming > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remainder > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will come in 3.7, and have > >> contacted > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> author > >>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> confirm. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - KIP-938 mentioned that the > >>> majority > >>>>> was > >>>>>>>>>>>> completed > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> small > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remainder > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> re: ForwardingManager metrics will > >>>>> come in > >>>>>>>>> 3.7. > >>>>>>>>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>>>>>> have > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contacted > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> author > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to confirm. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I then went through the JIRA > >> filter > >>>>> which > >>>>>>>>> looks > >>>>>>>>>>>> at > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> open > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fix > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Version of 3.7 and added KIP-770, > >>>>> KIP-858, > >>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> KIP-980. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also found a fair amount of > >> JIRAs > >>>>> that > >>>>>>>> were > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> targeting > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3.7 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consecutively had no activity on > >>> them > >>>>> for > >>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>> past > >>>>>>>>>>>>> few > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of those, I pinged the author and > >>>>> explicitly > >>>>>>>>>>>> asked > >>>>>>>>>>>>> if > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aim > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it to 3.7. I have not > >> included > >>>>> those > >>>>>>>> here > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> will > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> until > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hear > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> confirmation. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please review the plan and provide > >>> any > >>>>>>>>>>>> additional > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> information > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> updates > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regarding KIPs that target this > >>>>> release > >>>>>>>>> version > >>>>>>>>>>>>> (3.7). > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you have authored any KIPs that > >>>>> have an > >>>>>>>>>>>>> inaccurate > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> status > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> list, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or are not in the list and should > >>> be, > >>>>> or are > >>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> list > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - please inform me in this thread > >> so > >>>>> that I > >>>>>>>>> can > >>>>>>>>>>>> keep > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> document > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accurate > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and up to date. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Excited to get this release going! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All the best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 9:12 AM > >>> Bruno > >>>>>>>> Cadonna > >>>>>>>>> < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cado...@apache.org > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Stan! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bruno > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/23 7:24 AM, Luke Chen > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Stanislav! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at > >> 3:05 AM > >>>>> Josep > >>>>>>>> Prat > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <josep.p...@aiven.io.invalid > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Stanislav! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ——— > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Josep Prat > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Aiven Deutschland GmbH > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexanderufer 3-7, 10117 > >> Berlin > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, > >> HRB > >>>>> 209739 > >>>>>>>> B > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Geschäftsführer: Oskari > >>>>> Saarenmaa & > >>>>>>>> Hannu > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Valtonen > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> m: +491715557497 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> w: aiven.io > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> e: josep.p...@aiven.io > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023, 20:05 > >>> Chris > >>>>>>>> Egerton > >>>>>>>>> < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fearthecel...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1, thanks Stanislav! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023, 14:02 > >>> Bill > >>>>>>>> Bejeck < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bbej...@gmail.com > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, Stanislav! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Bill > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at > >>> 1:59 PM > >>>>> Ismael > >>>>>>>>>>>> Juma < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> m...@ismaeljuma.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for volunteering > >>>>> Stanislav! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ismael > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at > >>>>> 10:51 AM > >>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kozlovski > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <stanis...@confluent.io > >>>>> .invalid> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey all! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to volunteer > >>> to > >>>>> be the > >>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> manager > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> driving > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release - Apache Kafka > >>>>> *3.7.0*. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there are no > >> objections, > >>>>> I will > >>>>>>>>>>>> start > >>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> share > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plan > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mayank Shekhar Narula > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> Best, > >>>>>>>>> Stanislav > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Best, > >>> Stanislav > >>> > >> > > > > >
