> I cut the 1.0.x branch yesterday morning I do not see a "release/1.0.0" branch (which is a pattern used for previous releases).
[1]. PR1695 is labeled with 1.0 blocker, but we agreed that it's a best-to-have instead of a blocker per offline discussion, Where is this agreement recorded? As for me, the proposed rename does make sense to do before 1.0. [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1695. Cheers, Dmitri. On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 4:33 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks everyone for the contribution. We've finally resolved all > blockers[1]. I cut the 1.0.x branch yesterday morning. Will only cherry > pick bug fixes and license related commits to this branch starting now. > > [1]. PR1695 is labeled with 1.0 blocker, but we agreed that it's a > best-to-have instead of a blocker per offline discussion, > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1695. > > Yufei > > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 3:21 PM Eric Maynard <eric.w.mayn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > +1 to making 801 a blocker. > > > > Based on Alex's comments in 1799, it looks like the rotation is only > > happening in JdbcMetastoreManagerFactory? If so, I think we have a very > > simple fix in PR#1804 <https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1804>. > > > > --EM > > >
