Every three months sounds reasonable.

Would it be possible to specify the proposal in greater detail? Like when
do we do `minor`, `major`, `bugfix` releases, how do we approach
critical/blocker CVE's that can't wait for 3 months?
What is our LTS? How long do we support a release and such policies? Or do
you think this is off-topic? ( let me know I ll move it to new thread )
I am asking mainly because
in kiegroup we had some components that used to be sometime released in a
sense "out of the loop"  - mostly
components from kie-tools like vscode-extensions, chrome-extensions, web
tools. These were often released
with a new minor bugfix version update after we did release, of course only
if that made sense, be it blocker or enhancement.
The idea was that a blocker, for example, in vscode extension does not
warrant a new release of the whole stack.
Do we plan to allow such things going forward?

I supported the no answer, but a voice in my head suggests to me that in a
specific case we could want to only release tooling.
So what are your opinions on this? I need to clarify this before "plus
oneing".

Dominik

On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 at 14:55, Fabrizio Antonangeli <fantonang...@apache.org>
wrote:

> +1 for every three months. I would add that this can be a flexible
> target according to which functionalities we are developing.
> For instance if we are developing a major release which takes 2
> additional months, we can decide to release a minor earlier or a major
> after 3+2 months.
> I also agree releasing every month can be too much.
>
> On Tue, 2025-01-14 at 13:23 +0100, Pere Fernandez (apache) wrote:
> > I'm also +1 for one every three months. I don't think we could
> > currently
> > keep a 1 month cadence now.
> >
> > On Tue, 14 Jan 2025 at 13:20, Tibor Zimányi <tzima...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > after the responses I agree 1 per month is too much for now. One
> > > per three
> > > months should be fine as suggested.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Tibor
> > >
> > > Dňa ut 14. 1. 2025, 12:38 Yeser Amer <ya...@apache.org> napísal(a):
> > >
> > > > I tend to agree with the last comments.
> > > >
> > > > 3 months is a good compromise considering the current project
> > > > status.
> > > >
> > > > Yeser
> > > >
> > > > On 2025/01/14 11:12:37 Enrique Gonzalez Martinez wrote:
> > > > > Agreed that one month that might be overkilling as keeping in
> > > > > mind
> > > > > Dev + Code Freeze + Test (RC1...RCn) + Release
> > > > > It is way too much. This will lead to project resources
> > > > > starvation as
> > > > > we will spend more releasing that doing stuff.
> > > > > Any feature in the backend can take easily 1 month (any
> > > > > interesting
> > > > > stuff) best case scenario, so at least 2 months release would
> > > > > be the
> > > > > minimum.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers :)
> > > > >
> > > > > El mar, 14 ene 2025 a las 12:04, Toni Rikkola
> > > > > (<trikk...@redhat.com>)
> > > > escribió:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Every 3 months would likely be a good starting point. If
> > > > > > automation
> > > > ends up
> > > > > > being high enough, then once a month should not be an issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With everything that is missing for graduation I suspect we
> > > > > > have to
> > > > freeze
> > > > > > the code base every now and then, not ideal, but the easiest
> > > > > > path to
> > > > get
> > > > > > things done. This will slow down the PR streams making once a
> > > > > > month
> > > > > > releases less effective.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Toni
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 14, 2025 at 12:14 PM Jozef Marko
> > > > <jozef.ma...@ibm.com.invalid>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi, my personal opinion or experience is that 1 month
> > > > > > > cadence will
> > > > not
> > > > > > > work. A people that are members of the Apache KIE community
> > > > > > > work
> > > > also on
> > > > > > > other tasks. On tasks not related to the community release.
> > > > > > > I agree
> > > > good
> > > > > > > software should have often releases. One month is too brave
> > > > > > > goal in
> > > > my
> > > > > > > opinion. The window to do a release should be longer from
> > > > > > > my point
> > > > of view.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jozef Marko
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Software Developer
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > jozef.ma...@ibm.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > > > From: Tibor Zimányi <tzima...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > Sent: Friday, January 10, 2025 3:35 PM
> > > > > > > To: dev@kie.apache.org <dev@kie.apache.org>
> > > > > > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [PROPOSAL] Release cadence
> > > > > > > stabilization
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I personally think that after our first release, the most
> > > > > > > important
> > > > topic
> > > > > > > right now is to make sure we don't wait another year for
> > > > > > > another
> > > > release.
> > > > > > > Therefore I think it is important to define the release
> > > > > > > cadence
> > > that
> > > > we
> > > > > > > will follow and define a workflow, that we will follow in
> > > > > > > regular
> > > > time
> > > > > > > intervals, based on the agreed cadence. If you would agree,
> > > > > > > we
> > > > should first
> > > > > > > make sure we have regular releases again and then we could
> > > > > > > open
> > > more
> > > > broad
> > > > > > > and impactful discussions about repositories structure,
> > > > > > > etc.
> > > > Otherwise we
> > > > > > > risk being blocked for another year by these discussions.
> > > > > > > So here
> > > is
> > > > my
> > > > > > > proposal for the release cadence:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Release should be done each month.
> > > > > > > - There should be a vote about a person responsible for
> > > > > > > these
> > > monthly
> > > > > > > releases. We need to have a specific person that makes sure
> > > > > > > the
> > > > release
> > > > > > > workflow is progressing. The person doesn't need to do the
> > > > > > > actual
> > > > work,
> > > > > > > however should make sure the release process is being done
> > > > > > > in a
> > > > timely
> > > > > > > manner.
> > > > > > > - The person responsible for the release, makes sure the
> > > > > > > documented
> > > > > > > standard release process is followed.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This is a very rough proposal. I am open for feedback or
> > > > > > > other
> > > > proposals. I
> > > > > > > just think we should stabilize releases before we dive into
> > > > > > > more
> > > > broad
> > > > > > > discussions that could take months.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > > Tibor
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Saludos, Enrique González Martínez :)
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > ------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@kie.apache.org
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@kie.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > ----
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@kie.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@kie.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@kie.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@kie.apache.org
>
>

Reply via email to