> Thanks for raising the issue. I don’t have a strong opinion on whether or not to do the deprecation in this release, and since you say that it is minor, then I don’t see that it necessitates another respin. Since I had already started an RC2 build, then I just continued with it (and since the above issue is not yet reviewed ). If others feel like the deprecation should absolutely be in, then we can do an RC3.
++, makes total sense. Not worth stalling the RC. If RC2 fails to go forward for some other reason, I'd like to see if I can get this into RC3, but I wouldn't block RC2 for this minor change. Thanks! On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:43 AM Chris Hegarty <christopher.hega...@elastic.co.invalid> wrote: > For clarity, consider this vote cancelled. A new vote has been started on > an RC2 build. > > On 30 Nov 2023, at 16:22, Greg Miller <gsmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If we're spinning a new RC, I'd like to ask this group if it would make > sense to pull this very small method deprecation in: > https://github.com/apache/lucene/pull/12854 > > If there's a chance we don't release a 9.10 and go directly to 10.0, this > would be our last opportunity to mark it deprecated on a 9.x version so we > can actually remove it in 10.0. It's really minor though, so I don't want > to create churn, but if we can get it into 9.9 without much issue, it would > be nice. If folks agree, I can get it merged onto 9.9. > > > Thanks for raising the issue. I don’t have a strong opinion on whether or > not to do the deprecation in this release, and since you say that it is > minor, then I don’t see that it necessitates another respin. > > Since I had already started an RC2 build, then I just continued with it > (and since the above issue is not yet reviewed ). If others feel like the > deprecation should absolutely be in, then we can do an RC3. > > -Chris. > > Cheers, > -Greg > > On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 7:58 AM Michael Sokolov <msoko...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> for the sake of posterity, I did get a successful smoketest: >> >> SUCCESS! [1:00:06.512261] >> >> but +0 to release I guess since it's moot... >> >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:38 AM Michael McCandless < >> luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 9:56 AM Chris Hegarty >>> <christopher.hega...@elastic.co.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> P.S. I’m less sure about this, but the RC 2 starts a 72hr voting time >>>> again? (Just so I know what TTL to put on that) >>>> >>> >>> Yeah a new 72 hour clock starts with each new RC :) >>> >>> Mike McCandless >>> >>> http://blog.mikemccandless.com >>> >> >
