Hi All, I also propose to include [4884] in the next RC... If RC1 is built from the latest `main` this should happen automatically (the PR has already been merged).
[4884] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4884 Cheers, Dmitri. On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 5:05 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >
