Hi EJ, Thanks for cutting RC0!
While it is unfortunate that RC0 had issues (with the Spark plugin IIRC), now that some extra changes seem necessary anyway, I wonder if we could include [4860] into RC1? WDYT? [4860] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4860 Thanks, Dmitri. On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 1:16 PM EJ Wang <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > Quick update on the Apache Polaris 1.6.0 branch cut. > > The release workflow/documentation updates that were called out earlier > have now landed on main: > > - #4626: release-4 updates previous versioned-docs binary dist URLs to > archive > - #4650: release workflow 4 drops dist release SVN writes and documents the > manual PMC dev -> release move > > I have not seen any additional 1.6.0 blockers or must-have PRs called out > on this thread. > > The current main HEAD is green, and I plan to use it as the 1.6.0 cutoff: > *Add > external Polaris server test manager (#4843)* > > Unless there are last-minute objections, I will proceed with creating the > 1.6.0 release branch from this commit and start preparing the first release > candidate. > > Thanks, > -ej > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 5:09 PM EJ Wang <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > Quick update on the 1.6.0 branch cut: > > > > - Adnan's requested release workflow fix, #4626, has now landed on > > main. Thanks Adnan and reviewers. > > - The current main HEAD is: InMemoryBufferEventListener: fix cache > > removal logic and flaky test (#4677 > > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4677>) > > - I checked the current HEAD and the required checks are green. I have > > not seen any other PRs called out on this thread as must-have > blockers for > > 1.6.0. > > > > The one remaining release-process PR I am watching is #4650, which > > documents/moves the dist dev -> dist release SVN steps to a manual PMC > > action after the vote. It is mergeable and green, but still pending > > review/merge. If #4650 lands shortly, I plan to use the main commit > > immediately after #4650 as the final 1.6.0 cutoff. Otherwise, I plan to > > proceed from the current green main HEAD above and keep coordinating the > > manual post-vote steps with PMC help. > > > > Please call out any objections or must-have PRs soon; otherwise I will > > proceed with preparing the 1.6.0 release branch/RC from that cutoff. > > > > Thanks, > > -ej > > > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 12:44 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> Thanks to both of you for the review and updates. I will perform a pass > on > >> the PR now so we can move forward with the 1.6.0 release as planned. > >> > >> Regards, > >> JB > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 6:33 PM EJ Wang <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Thanks Adnan! this makes sense to get in before the branch cut. The > >> > workflow placement looks good to me, and updating the superseded > >> versioned > >> > docs during release publication should prevent old binary distribution > >> > links from breaking after cleanup. > >> > > >> > I left one small question about preserving the incubator archive path > >> for > >> > older incubating release docs. Otherwise LGTM. > >> > > >> > -ej > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 4:00 PM Adnan Hemani via dev < > >> > [email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > I would say, we should wait for this PR to land before we branch > cut. > >> > This > >> > > will help us solve an issue we've had for a while that no one > >> reported: > >> > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4626/changes. If we don't > take > >> > this > >> > > PR into 1.6.0, then fixing this issue will likely have to wait until > >> > 1.7.0 > >> > > - which keeps all historical release links broken in the meantime. > >> > > > >> > > Best, > >> > > Adnan Hemani > >> > > > >> > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 3:16 PM EJ Wang < > >> [email protected]> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Thanks, JB! Reviewed and approved. > >> > > > > >> > > > All, > >> > > > I have not seen any specific must-have PRs or release blockers > >> called > >> > out > >> > > > for 1.6.0. > >> > > > > >> > > > Unless there are objections, I plan to use the current main branch > >> > after > >> > > > the release workflow/documentation update in #4650 lands as the > >> cutoff > >> > > > point for 1.6.0. Concretely, I will cut the release branch from > the > >> > main > >> > > > commit immediately after #4650 is merged. > >> > > > > >> > > > If anyone has a must-have PR that should be included in 1.6.0, > >> please > >> > > call > >> > > > it out on this thread by <date/time>. Otherwise, I will proceed > with > >> > that > >> > > > cutoff and start preparing the first RC. > >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks, > >> > > > -ej > >> > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2026 at 9:21 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > >> [email protected]> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Hi > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Following this discussion, I updated the release process and > >> > > > documentation: > >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4650 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Regards > >> > > > > JB > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2026 at 11:02 PM EJ Wang < > >> > > [email protected]> > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks Dmitri, Yufei, and JB. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > I will keep moving forward with the June 26 target then. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks JB and Yufei for offering to help with the PMC-only > >> > post-vote > >> > > > > steps. > >> > > > > > I will coordinate with you when we get closer to the > >> > RC/vote/publish > >> > > > > > stages. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > For #4579, I will add it to the release tracker and watch the > >> > related > >> > > > > PRs. > >> > > > > > Given the discussion so far, I will treat it as something we > >> should > >> > > try > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > > resolve before cutting the RC, but not necessarily a hard > >> blocker > >> > > > unless > >> > > > > > others feel strongly that it should block 1.6.0. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, > >> > > > > > -ej > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2026 at 9:43 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected] > > > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks for filing the issue. It's great to have it. I'm OK > to > >> > > > consider > >> > > > > > 4579 > >> > > > > > > either a blocker or non-blocker, as we have made releases > >> without > >> > > it > >> > > > > > > multiple times. I can also help with PMC duty. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Yufei > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Sun, May 31, 2026 at 10:48 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > >> > > > [email protected] > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hi EJ, > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > This plan sounds good to me. Thanks for volunteering! > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > I have created > >> https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/4579, > >> > as > >> > > > the > >> > > > > > > > release workflow and documentation need to be updated. I > am > >> > > > currently > >> > > > > > > > working on this, and it should be considered a release > >> blocker. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Additionally, you will need the assistance of a PMC member > >> to > >> > > > > complete > >> > > > > > > > the post-vote release steps. I will be happy to help you > >> with > >> > > that > >> > > > > > > > process. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Regards, > >> > > > > > > > JB > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Fri, May 29, 2026 at 9:16 PM EJ Wang < > >> > > > > > [email protected]> > >> > > > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hi all, > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I would like to volunteer as the release manager for > >> Apache > >> > > > Polaris > >> > > > > > > > 1.6.0. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I am thinking about targeting Friday, June 26, 2026 for > >> the > >> > > > > release, > >> > > > > > > > > assuming the community agrees and we do not have > blocking > >> > > issues > >> > > > by > >> > > > > > > then. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > To start planning, could folks please share if there are > >> any: > >> > > > > > > > > - release blockers for 1.6.0 > >> > > > > > > > > - must-have PRs that should be included > >> > > > > > > > > - timing concerns around the proposed date > >> > > > > > > > > - areas where you would like to help validate the > release > >> > > > candidate > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Based on the previous 1.5.0 release flow, my rough plan > >> is: > >> > > > > > > > > - collect blockers and must-have PRs over the next > couple > >> of > >> > > > weeks > >> > > > > > > > > - start converging the scope around mid-June > >> > > > > > > > > - prepare the changelog/release notes and cut the first > RC > >> > > around > >> > > > > > June > >> > > > > > > 20 > >> > > > > > > > > - keep the vote open for at least 72 hours > >> > > > > > > > > - publish and announce the release around June 26 if the > >> vote > >> > > > > passes > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I will also keep an eye on release workflow/artifact > >> > > validation, > >> > > > > > > > including > >> > > > > > > > > source artifacts, Maven artifacts, Docker images, Helm > >> chart, > >> > > > > Python > >> > > > > > > > > package, and the website/downloads page. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Please let me know if this timeline sounds reasonable, > or > >> if > >> > > > there > >> > > > > > are > >> > > > > > > > > concerns I should account for. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Thanks, > >> > > > > > > > > -ej > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
