Discussed multiple times with JB last Thursday(6/5/2025) and this
Monday(6/9/2025), we agreed to consider it as a nice-to-have instead of a
blocker.


I'm sure none of JB's statements (even though I was not part of those
meetings, IIRC) implied that the agreement is community-wide.

The Apache Way is that "off-list discourse and transactions must be brought
on-list" [1]

[1] https://www.apache.org/theapacheway/

Cheers,
Dmitri.

On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 6:20 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The branch name is "1.0.x".
>
> Where is this agreement recorded?
>
> Discussed multiple times with JB last Thursday(6/5/2025) and this
> Monday(6/9/2025), we agreed to consider it as a nice-to-have instead of a
> blocker.
>
> As a matter of best practice, given the previous related discussion thread
> > [1], it would have been nice to conclude it with a message about starting
> > the 1.0 release process before actually cutting the branch.
>
> We got consensus on thread[1]. The 1.0 release was also prepared way before
> the thread. We will kick off 1.0 release even if 0.10 is not canceled. JB
> and I discussed the parallel releasing option for both versions. Also the
> last PPMC member's agreement on thread[1] happened 5 days ago, which passed
> the lazy consensus window. But I agreed it's nice to conclude a thread.
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/8kx1mjg7hsq09z3rlmf77g4trs5p9xrh
>
> Yufei
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 2:33 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I cut the 1.0.x branch yesterday morning.
> >
> >
> > As a matter of best practice, given the previous related discussion
> thread
> > [1], it would have been nice to conclude it with a message about starting
> > the 1.0 release process before actually cutting the branch.
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/8kx1mjg7hsq09z3rlmf77g4trs5p9xrh
> >
> > Thanks,
> > 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
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to