I moved the issues to 0.9.0 and Arpad removed 0.8.0 from Jira. Judging from the lack of replies, there seem to be no blocking issues. I volunteer to take RM duties for the release.
Marton On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 at 15:40, Arpad Boda <ab...@apache.org> wrote: > I think moving the tickets to 0.9.0 is easier, so +1 for 0.9.0! > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 4:17 PM Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Marton, > > > > I think if consensus matches your view on api stability then 0.9.0 is > most > > appropriate over a 1.0 for now. The progress made here in the past year > is > > really awesome and frankly knowing some of the uses of this at the scale > > and diversity of usage is really exciting. > > > > You would just remove the 0.8.0 JIRA target and ensure any tickets tagged > > there are tagged to 0.9.0? Or just go back to 0.8.0 and get rid of 0.9? > > > > Thanks > > > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 7:55 AM Marton Szasz <sza...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Hi community, > > > > > > I'd like to initiate a discussion about the next release of MiNiFi C++. > > The > > > last release was over a year ago, and there have been countless new > > > features, bug fixes and stability improvements committed to the > > development > > > branch since then. > > > > > > Some highlights from the last year: > > > - Added support for RocksDB-based content repository for better > > performance > > > - Added SQL extension > > > - Improved task scheduling > > > - Various C2 improvements > > > - Bug fixes and improvements to TailFile, ConsumeWindowsEventLog, > > > MergeContent, CompressContent, PublishKafka, InvokeHTTP > > > - Implemented RetryFlowFile and smart handling of loopback connections > > > - Added a way to encrypt sensitive config properties and the flow > > > configuration > > > - Implemented full S3 support > > > - Reduced memory footprint when working with many flow files > > > > > > Why 0.9.0 instead of 0.8.0? > > > The codebase is starting to stabilize and we're getting closer to a 1.0 > > > milestone, but I feel like the extension API is not yet something we > can > > > commit to support in the long term. Additionally, a release branch for > > > 0.8.0 has been created earlier, but it was not released, and with all > the > > > new development it wouldn't make sense to release it. > > > > > > Do you think 0.9.0 is a good target, or would you go with 0.8.0 or 1.0 > > > instead? Are there any blockers that should definitely make it into the > > > next release? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Marton > > > > > >
