I'd suggest moving open jiras to 0.10.0. Make a conscious decision to move to backlog separately.
On Mon, Nov 3, 2025, 6:58 PM György Gál <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I am planning to create "branch-0.9" and set the main version to > "0.10.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT". > > I will also update the Fix versions from "0.9.0" to (empty) on all open > LIVY JIRAs in preparation for the 0.9.0 release. > > Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. > > Thanks, > Gyorgy > > On Mon, Oct 13, 2025 at 11:32 AM György Gál <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Thank you very much, Damon, for offering your help with this! I will > > contact you directly about taking over the RM tasks and the possible > > release process improvements. > > > > Gyorgy > > > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 3:23 PM Damon Cortesi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hi Gyorgy, > >> > >> As the previous RM, happy to help with this process. Feel free to reach > >> out to me directly. > >> > >> I think I also have some old changes I need to dig up to help improve > the > >> build/release process, so will try to find those in the next few days. > >> > >> Damon > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 1:04 PM György Gál <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> Thank you, Larry, for starting this thread. > >>> > >>> I will volunteer as Release Manager, however any help is much > >>> appreciated because this would be the first time for me. (I did not > >>> actively take part in the 0.8.0 release tasks at the time.) > >>> > >>> Regarding Java 17 support, I have an open PR at > >>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-livy/pull/481 . This change does > >>> not drop support for Java 8, but enables running Livy with both > versions. > >>> (Maybe the deprecation could be done in an upcoming release along with > the > >>> removal of Spark 2 and Python 2 support and the introduction of Spark 4 > >>> support). The reason why the unit tests are currently failing on that > PR is > >>> that the test Docker image does not contain JDK17, it is this change > that > >>> adds it. Please let me know your thoughts on whether Java 17 support > should > >>> be part of the 0.9.0 release and please feel free to comment on the PR > as > >>> well. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Gyorgy > >>> > >>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 1:52 PM Arnav Balyan <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Larry, > >>>> Thank you so much for initiating this. I can help with documentation > >>>> and validation for the release if needed. > >>>> I'd be happy to contribute to the Java 17 support, it looks very > >>>> promising. > >>>> > >>>> - Arnav > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 10:52 PM larry mccay <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Let's try with the correct dev@ list now! :) > >>>>> > >>>>> Livy Devs - > >>>>> > >>>>> We have a number of bug fixes, dependency upgrades and a few > impactful > >>>>> features available for an 0.9.0 release. > >>>>> > >>>>> I think that we should also consider whether we want to drop support > >>>>> for Java 8 in 0.9.0 or whether we want to wait for another iteration > like > >>>>> 0.10.0. Since it is a breaking change, we can't really do it in a dot > >>>>> release. > >>>>> > >>>>> We will need a Release Manager volunteer to run through the process > >>>>> and potentially work with a previous release manager as needed to > help > >>>>> detail and document what needs to be done. > >>>>> > >>>>> Depending on the discussion for Java 8, we can try and target a > >>>>> release candidate in a few weeks or a couple months if we are adding > Java > >>>>> 17+ support. > >>>>> > >>>>> So, action items: > >>>>> > >>>>> 1. Need an RM volunteer - @[email protected] > >>>>> <[email protected]> are you interested? > >>>>> 2. Thoughts on Java 8 deprecation in 0.9.0 > >>>>> 3. Timeline for first release candidate > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> What say, you all? > >>>>> > >>>>> thanks, > >>>>> > >>>>> —larry > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 1:17 PM larry mccay <[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Livy Devs - > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We have a number of bug fixes, dependency upgrades and a few > >>>>>> impactful features available for an 0.9.0 release. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I think that we should also consider whether we want to drop support > >>>>>> for Java 8 in 0.9.0 or whether we want to wait for another > iteration like > >>>>>> 0.10.0. Since it is a breaking change, we can't really do it in a > dot > >>>>>> release. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We will need a Release Manager volunteer to run through the process > >>>>>> and potentially work with a previous release manager as needed to > help > >>>>>> detail and document what needs to be done. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Depending on the discussion for Java 8, we can try and target a > >>>>>> release candidate in a few weeks or a couple months if we are > adding Java > >>>>>> 17+ support. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> So, action items: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 1. Need an RM volunteer - @[email protected] > >>>>>> <[email protected]> are you interested? > >>>>>> 2. Thoughts on Java 8 deprecation in 0.9.0 > >>>>>> 3. Timeline for first release candidate > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> What say, you all? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> thanks, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> —larry > >>>>>> > >>>>> >
