Dimiri, Thanks a lot for driving this initiative[1]. Can you raise a separate dev mail thread for this? I think this deserves a broad awareness.
1. https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1890 Yufei On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 4:53 AM Robert Stupp <sn...@snazy.de> wrote: > I was thinking of how the Docker images are being staged and eventually > released. I know there was a dev-ML thread about this, but I think this > topic is important for the 1.0 release, so raising it here. > > The release-guide doesn't mention images at all, so the process isn't > clear. > > TL;DR of my reasoning is that we likely need 3 (!) repositories for both > the server and admin-tool: > * one for nightlies > * one for staging (before release-vote passes) > * one for released versions > > Due to the nature and restrictions of image repositories (no notion of > "snapshots") we cannot push "pending releases" to the 3rd one, because > tools like renovate of dependabot would blindly use those (same problem > as nightlies vs releases). > > Thoughts? > > On 16.05.25 04:31, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > Hi Yufei > > > > Thanks for your message ! > > > > It looks good to me. > > > > As prerequisite (obviously), we should also complete > > 0.10.0-beta-incubating release to be sure we are good there before > > 1.0.0. > > > > Just a comment: I think we should limit the number of community > > meetings. This topic should be typically discussed on the mailing list > > (as you are doing :)). > > The reasons why I'm not big fan of too much meeetings are: > > 1. No everyone in the community can join (due to timezone, not willing > > to speak/appear on call, ...) > > 2. It puts "pressure" on the community to attend ("if I'm not in the > > meeting, I'm not in the community" issue) > > 3. Due to 1 & 2, no decision should be taken in meetings, and even if > > meetings are recorded, it's not archive as mailing list > > So, I encourage meetings as community meet&greed, or to discuss about > > specific topics, not decision making topic. > > > > Thanks, > > Regards > > JB > > > > > > On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 11:38 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi folks, > >> > >> Many users have been asking about the Polaris release, and I believe > it's > >> critical to have a formal, production-ready 1.0 release ASAP. Thanks to > the > >> community’s hard work, we’re very close with a few remaining blockers we > >> need to resolve. > >> > >> To keep things moving, I scheduled a community meeting for the 1.0 > release > >> next Monday at 9 AM PST. At the same time, sharing all issues marked > with > >> 1.0 blocker. We could resolve them here if possible. Feel free to chime > in, > >> remove the blocker tag if you think it's not a blocker, or pick any up. > >> Thanks a lot in advance! > >> > >> Here is the list: > >> > >> - Add CI for Python code ( > >> <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1058>#1058), > >> - Polaris persistence concurrency issues (#777) > >> <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/777> > >> - Task handling is incomplete (#774) > >> <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/774> > >> - Generated files in regtests/client/python/polaris (#755) > >> <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/755> > >> - Resources not properly closed, resource & memory leaks (#563) > >> <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/563> > >> - Make Polaris safe against certain unparseable locations (#552) > >> <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/552> > >> - [BUG] Assumption that cache eviction does not happen (#544) > >> <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/544> > >> > >> To make it more interactive, you can also comment on the google > >> spreadsheet here: > >> > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GyLvp2cdYwioOsBwszNWiphZt_IIdo4LIfsZBFV88mc/edit?usp=sharing > >> > >> Yufei > > -- > Robert Stupp > @snazy > >
