Agree. Will cut the branch tomorrow or Thursday.

Current list of 9.0 blockers: 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12351219
Please jump in and help with the ones you care for.

PS: I found a bunch of issues assigned to the "9.0" fixVersion, I moved them 
all to "main (9.0)" which is the correct version to use for 9.0.

Jan

> 3. jan. 2022 kl. 20:08 skrev David Smiley <[email protected]>:
> 
> I completely agree with Houston; let's not create branch_9_0 yet.
> 
> ~ David Smiley
> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley 
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley>
> 
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 11:36 AM Houston Putman <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> I think its fine to start with just branch_9x until we are ready to actually 
> do the release, even if it is unconventional for our processes. There’s  no 
> need to have a branch_9_0 until there are actual reasons that 9x and 9_0 
> would differ (i.e. 9.0.0 is ready to be released and people want to add 
> things for 9.1.0).
> 
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 10:31 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Happy New Year everyone!
> 
> According to my initial mail it's now time to cut branch_9x. However, I'm in 
> the middle of some build and build-script tuning, so it may delay a few days 
> more.
> 
> I'm also wondering whether it's better to cut both branch_9x and well as 
> branch_9_0 so everyone can continue adding features for 9.1, with the cost of 
> having to do another backport for every fix that is targeted for 9.0. Will it 
> be confusing to treat branch_9x as a feature-frozen release-branch for all of 
> January?
> 
> Jan
> 
>> 21. des. 2021 kl. 20:03 skrev David Smiley <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
>> 
>> Thanks for volunteering to be the RM!
>> 
>> No comment on the timeline; I'm in denial of the time flying.  Log4shell and 
>> all that.
>> 
>> Let's go to Lucene 9.1 and not 9.0.  I'm seeing a massive change to 
>> lucene-test-framework in 9.1 on it's way that IMO ought to have been done in 
>> 9.0.  Going right to 9.1 averts issues there for Solr users writing plugins.
>> 
>> You're right RE blockers -- it's always tough to let go of our 
>> ideals/hopes/dreams on what we want 9.0 to be.
>> 
>> ~ David Smiley
>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley 
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley>
>> 
>> On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 10:57 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Solr's next feature release will be 9.0 (as 8x is in bugfix mode).
>> Let's not even think about hacking an 8.12 release based on lucene-solr 8x 
>> branch. It will be ugly.
>> 
>> The "Solr 9.0 release blockers" thread 
>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread/m7k2gvgxldkns7jqjnw1ghhqx7s3tpl1> was 
>> started exactly 2 months ago to try to prepare us. But we're moving slowly. 
>> The same happened for Lucene, until the 9.0 release :) So I'll start the 
>> train right now...
>> 
>> I propose the following rough roadmap:
>> 
>> December: Cut branch_9x next week and enter feature freeze on that branch
>> January: Remove blockers, prepare build & release machinery, including Docker
>> February: Cut branch_9_0 and build RC1 - branch_9x is again re-opened for 
>> new features
>> 
>> I volunteer as RM.
>> 
>> Wrt blockers, we need to be tough on ourselves and ask the question "Is it 
>> possible to release 9.0 without this?"..
>> At the end of January we should have only a few real blockers left, that are 
>> all actively in progress.
>> The delay between branch_9x and branch_9_0 is to avoid having to backport 
>> everything twice during the hardening phase.
>> 
>> Jan
>> 
> 

Reply via email to