I very much agree on the release. I don't remember why we didn't bump the Omid version in 5.1 after it was released. If it doesn't break anything, then it's a good thing.
I disagree on removing the old HBase version support. Just as HBase doesn't remove support for old Hadoop versions in new patch (or even minor) releases, I think it would be much kinder to our users not to force them to upgrade HBase, when it really doesn't cost us much to maintain support for the old versions. (Even if the build with 2.1 and 2.2 is broken now) I think that we should make an effort to increase Phoenix adoption beyond SFDC and the CLDR customer base. Making life easier for users of the Apache releases by not forcing an HBase upgrade is a step in that direction. Regular releases are also something that projects the image of a healthy project. Disclaimer: CLDR maintains an LTS release with Phoenix 5.1 and HBase 2.2, so it would make life a bit harder for us, too. Istvan On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 6:57 AM Viraj Jasani <vjas...@apache.org> wrote: > Thank you for the response, Rajeshbabu. > > > Bump up Omid to 1.1.0 > > Sounds good. > > > > Remove the support of HBase versions <2.3.x > > Those versions are long EOL'ed so yes perhaps it makes sense to drop their > support, though I am not sure if we need to manage compatibility for the > patch release. > If we have consensus, it's fine to remove them. No strong opinion either > way but I am slightly inclined to remove the support since they are already > EOL'ed. > > 2.3 is also EOL'ed, but we should keep it anyway since it was a stable > release line for quite some time and some users might still be using 2.3.x > versions. > > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 9:38 PM rajeshb...@apache.org < > chrajeshbab...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Would be better to do few things before release. > > 1) Bump up Omid to 1.1.0 > > 2) Remove the support of HBase versions <2.3.x > > > > These would just backports . I will do it if it's fine. > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 9:14 AM Viraj Jasani <vjas...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > It's been almost a year since we had the last patch release on the 5.1 > > > release line. As discussed on other threads, 5.2 release can wait a > > little > > > longer for some of the features that are in progress. In the meantime, > we > > > should also keep the 5.1 release line active. > > > > > > We have some good contributions on the 5.1 release line. Unless anyone > > > would like to be the RM for 5.1.4, I would volunteer to start the > release > > > preparation early next week. > > > > > > -- *István Tóth* | Sr. Staff Software Engineer *Email*: st...@cloudera.com cloudera.com <https://www.cloudera.com> [image: Cloudera] <https://www.cloudera.com/> [image: Cloudera on Twitter] <https://twitter.com/cloudera> [image: Cloudera on Facebook] <https://www.facebook.com/cloudera> [image: Cloudera on LinkedIn] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/cloudera> ------------------------------ ------------------------------
