Good. I will send an email to u...@pulsar.apache.org that states the EOL status for 2.6
Enrico Il giorno lun 10 gen 2022 alle ore 19:26 Chris Herzog <cher...@tibco.com.invalid> ha scritto: > > I agree with 2.6 EOL. > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 2:35 AM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > This thread is now to moving branch-2.6 (the Pulsar 2.6 release line) > > to End-Of-Life status > > > > What EOL means here: > > - No more releases, even for security bugs > > - No cherry-picks to branch-2.6 > > > > We will apply the Lazy Consensus rules > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus > > > > If no-one objects within 72 hours I will send an official announcement > > of the EOL status of 2.6. > > > > Enrico > > > > > > Il giorno mar 4 gen 2022 alle ore 06:04 Michael Marshall > > <mmarsh...@apache.org> ha scritto: > > > > > > I agree with Dave. Lazy consensus gives us exactly what we need: to > > > know if someone would like branch-2.6 to stay alive. If no one > > > responds that they need it within the time period, then no one needs > > > it. > > > > > > PIP 47 briefly mentions our EOL policy, but the policy doesn't cover > > > our current case where we released fewer than 4 minor versions in a > > > year. I think we'd benefit from clarifying and improving our > > > documentation for our EOL policy. > > > > > > > This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been > > involved with during the last 14 years. > > > > > > The new PIP process, with its increased purview, has increased the > > > number of votes. I have appreciated the increased development > > > discussion on the ML, but maybe the discussions (especially the ones > > > that look like votes) and then the subsequent votes are leading to the > > > high vote volume. > > > > > > We could update the PIP process so that DISCUSSIONS without any > > > pushback during a certain time period do not need VOTES. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 6:00 PM Dave Fisher <w...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > This project VOTEs on more things than any Apache project I’ve been > > involved with during the last 14 years. > > > > > > > > For most projects lazy consensus applies: > > https://www.apache.org/foundation/glossary.html#LazyConsensus > > > > > > > > We also tend to “vote” during discussions which does not really > > advance a conversation. > > > > > > > > If we want to have a VOTE then there are good reasons to start it NOW. > > > > > > > > All the Best, > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > On Jan 3, 2022, at 3:48 PM, Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Agree to have a vote to keep a record. > > > > > > > > > > - Sijie > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 3:40 PM 陳智弘 <thomasec...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> I think having a vote and quickly announce the EOF of 2.6.x will be > > better > > > > >> to the community. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> Dave Fisher <w...@apache.org> 於 2022年1月4日 週二 06:06 寫道： > > > > >> > > > > >>> I don’t think we need a VOTE. Let’s do this by LAZY CONSENSUS. > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> On Jan 3, 2022, at 10:05 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Hello, > > > > >>>> We are no more cutting releases out of branch-2.6 > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> We must declare 2.6 EOF. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> IIUC there is no process established for this at the moment in the > > > > >> Pulsar > > > > >>>> project. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> So for this time I will call out a VOTE next week, as we did not > > cut > > > > >>>> releases for a few important bugs. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Thoughts? > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Enrico > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Chris Herzog Messaging Team | O 630 300 7718 | M 815 263 3764 | > www.tibco.com > > <http://www.tibco.com/>
