Yes "fix version". By "a single task list" do you mean one issue with sub-tasks? Definitely "-1" from me as it seems like a huge misuse of JIRA when the concept of a version is already present. I think issues can't be multi-level as well so it'd rule out any bigger items that already have sub-tasks.
Here are all LUCENE/SOLR issues that are not resolved with a fix version of "master (9.0)": https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20in%20(LUCENE%2C%20SOLR)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%20%22master%20(9.0)%22%20AND%20resolution%20is%20EMPTY%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC There are many -- 134. As to be expected, many are aspirational and we'll never get to by 9 or ever, and of course sometimes a contributor sets the version prematurely. I think we could further refine this by considering the assignee, and assign or unassign ourselves as we volunteer to get stuff done. Speaking of which, maybe we could make "fix version" only settable by us committers? ~ David Smiley Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 5:42 PM Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > Are you thinking individual JIRAs just with a “fix version” of 9.0 or a > single task-list with them all? One task list seems easier to follow…. > > > On Feb 2, 2020, at 4:48 PM, David Smiley <david.w.smi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > We can use JIRA to annotate what we want to do for 9x. I know from > experience it can be a bit aspirational and that's okay. Eventually > reality will set in and we'll remove the fix-version accordingly. > > > > ~ David Smiley > > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 4:46 PM Adrien Grand <jpou...@gmail.com> wrote: > > One Lucene issue I'd like to have in 9.0 is > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-9047, which is about making > our directory abstractions little-endian instead of big-endian. It would be > breaking enough that it should be done in a major. > > > > On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 3:35 PM Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > What are people’s thoughts about Solr 9.0? It’d be a little faster than > our recent cadence, the last two major releases were about 18 months after > the one before and we released Solr 8.0 last March. > > > > Besides the usual reasons, there are two drivers I can think of: > > > > 1> We can drop Java 8 compatibility. > > 2> We can migrate to exclusively use Gradle as the build system. > > > > The Gradle build isn’t complete yet, although it’s maturing pretty > quickly (and Dawid has yeoman’s duty!). My question isn’t so much “should > we start the release process for Solr 9.0 next week” as it is “What > milestones should we reach before starting the 9.0 release process?” > > > > Maybe something as simple as “Start the 9.0 process a month after > removing the ant components of the build system”. > > > > And a reasonable answer at this point is “it’s way too early to even > talk about it”. > > > > Erick > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > > > > > > -- > > Adrien > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
