Hi Chia-Ping and Bruno, Right. Matthias stated that the 3 releases rule is the source of truth and I don't recall that being the case. The source of truth is 12 months - I was one of the people who was part of that discussion when the Scala consumer was removed. I also disagree that the 3 releases rule is strictly better since we can sometimes have shorter release cycles (like the intent with the 3.9 release). I am ok with adjusting the rule to be "at least 3 releases _and_ a minimum of 12 months" as part of this KIP, but we should be clear that we're proposing a change as part of this KIP (vs following an existing rule).
Ismael On Mon, Mar 3, 2025 at 1:24 AM Bruno Cadonna <cado...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I suspect that the three-release-rule was a derivation from the > 1-year-rule since we usually have three releases in one year. > > IMO, a three-release rule is easier to reason about, because you don't > need to know when the release took place. > > However, I recognize that the 1-year-rule seems to be the official rule. > > Best, > Bruno > > On 03.03.25 09:58, Chia-Ping Tsai wrote: > > hi Ismael > > > > The thread[0] contains a brief discussion about the one-year rule. I've > > also updated the KIP page[1] to highlight this rule. However, declaring > > [3.7-3.9] as API compatible with 4.0 can be unrelated to the one-year > rule. > > We can do this for consistency, ensuring clients, Streams, and Connect > have > > the same version range. Additionally, we can address this by reverting a > > minor commit. If we don't agree on consistency, we can update the KIP to > > include different API compatibility versions for Connect. > > > > [0] https://lists.apache.org/thread/j7n4qqsvxz84f5cg89kdm9foby36j28n > > [1] > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/diffpagesbyversion.action?pageId=65867320&selectedPageVersions=9&selectedPageVersions=8 > > > > Best, > > Chia-Ping > > > >
