That's good advice. I will take it into account. Actually, it contains significant changes. We introduce BulkLoad and a few storage-incompatible changes in this version. We call it 2.1.0 rather than 3.0.0 because we had just released 2.0.0 three months ago. I have doubt if it's appropriate for such frequent leaps of the major version, considering the incompatibilities are opaque to clients. I still think it's more reasonable to remain 2.x.
张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> 于2020年9月14日周一 下午8:23写道： > I do not think it worth to have a beta release for a minor release? If this > release contains big changes, I think we should bump the major version? > Maybe call it 3.0.0? Then we could have alpha1, alpha2, ..., then beta1, > beta2, ..., then the final release. But notice that, if it is a 'release', > it must be 'formal', which means you should get at least 3 binding +1s. > > If you want developpers to help testing, you can try to publish nightly > builds on jenkins? > > Thanks. > > Tao Wu <wutao.as.nevercha...@gmail.com> 于2020年9月14日周一 下午7:48写道： > > > Ok, I'm afraid I misunderstood the merit of releasing... > > > > I thought the value of RC1 is that our community users are able to test > it, > > instead of > > waiting until we officially announce that release with all issues fixed > > perfectly. > > I supposed it would receive no vote at the beginning. Maybe I should call > > it > > 2.1.0-beta1 and release it in an informal discussion thread. > > > > I will call for a vote of RC2 next time and fix the building issues. > > Sorry for this mistake. > > Thank you for your reminding. > > > > Regards > > Tao Wu > > > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> 于2020年9月14日周一 下午6:31写道： > > > > > What do you mean by 'This issue will be fixed in the next candidate. '? > > > What we vote here is the 2.1.0 release, once the vote passed, 2.1.0-RC1 > > > will be 2.1.0. Otherwise you need to cut 2.1.0-RC2, 2.1.0RC3, etc. > > > So in general, you should say 'This issue will be fixed in the next > > > release. ' > > > > > > But for me, I'm -1 on this RC if we can not build it from the > downloaded > > > source. You do not publish binaries in your release, and users can not > > > build the binaries through the published sources, then what is the > value > > of > > > the release? > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > Tao Wu <wutao.as.nevercha...@gmail.com> 于2020年9月14日周一 下午6:25写道： > > > > > > > Hello Pegasus devs! > > > > > > > > The Pegasus team is happy to announce the Apache Pegasus 2.1.0-RC1. > > > > > > > > Apache Pegasus 2.1.0 is a feature release that offers many features > and > > > > improvements since the prior release. > > > > > > > > This is a source-only release. The artifacts have been staged here: > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/pegasus/2.1.0/rc1/ > > > > As a known issue, this release candidate can not be built directly > from > > > the > > > > downloaded source artifact. Because in the current building process, > > the > > > > source must be a git repo. This issue will be fixed in the next > > > candidate. > > > > You can temporarily test out this release via git clone. > > > > > > > > It is tagged in Git as 2.1.0-RC1 and the corresponding hash is the > > > > following: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-pegasus.git;a=commit;h=4f8db17808470a999b9a7c49d451ff6e957f15e6 > > > > > > > > The WIP release notes can be found here: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ul5W0ViA6HK0h4blu3PD2JKnUR_8SSViHXQmmzHyew8/edit?usp=sharing > > > > > > > > The KEYS file to verify the artifact signatures can be found here: > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/pegasus/KEYS > > > > > > > > The vote will run until Friday, Sep 18 18:00:00 PST 2020. > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > Tao Wu > > > > > > > > > >
