The New feature list for 9.0 is * Replica placement plugins * Rate limiting and task management * Certificate Auth Plugin * SQL Query interface in UI
None of these are compelling search features which will motivate anyone to upgrade OTOH , vector search is a very attractive feature and even if it we release that as "experimental" users are likely to upgrade So, please consider including that On Sun, Jan 9, 2022 at 11:35 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> wrote: > > IMPORTANT > > Just created branch_9_0 off of branch_9x, and bumped version on branch_9x to > 9.1. > > This means that everything is back to normal branch structure, and the > feature freeze is now only on branch_9_0. > > Ishan, that also means that you only need to revert SOLR-15694 on branch_9_0, > and let it remain on branch_9x, while you let it bake. > > I also added these Jenkins jobs: > - Solr-Artifacts-9x > - Solr-Check-9.x > - Solr-reference-guide-9.x > - Solr-Artifacts-9.0 > - Solr-Check-9.0 > - Solr-reference-guide-9.0 > > Jan > > 9. jan. 2022 kl. 01:04 skrev Jan Høydahl <[email protected]>: > > Hi, > > This is indeed a deliberate deviation from established branch process, as > debated and decided in the "Solr 9.0.0 release in February" thread > https://lists.apache.org/thread/pzqvmcxcjhkrj2xb31sj3pwzrn6x9vd3 and repeated > on this very thread, so this is far from some SNEAKY attempt to trick you all > :) However, the intent of minimizing number of backports in a period where > the project is in 9.0 release focus (there will be tons of commits) seemd > brilliant just a week ago, but I can see that we also need a place to land > 9.1 features now and not wait until February. > > As several committers are in support of freeing branch_9x for feature > development for 9.1, I'll go ahead and create the branch_9_0 branch now. > > Ishan: What warrants a release is subjective, but noone can accuse the Solr > project of RUSHING with the 9.0 release. Have a look at the Major Changes in > Solr 9 page if you need a reminder of what we have been keeping from our > users (and developers not the least) for too long. > Someone will always have a "killer feature" around the corner. Fine, then 9.1 > will also get a nice killer feature. Or 9.2. More champagne! But lack of a > brand new feature is never a blocker for any release. > > Jan > > 8. jan. 2022 kl. 02:45 skrev Ishan Chattopadhyaya <[email protected]>: > > > branch_9x is in feature freeze! We want to stabilize > > Feature freeze is meant for the release branches. There is no precedent for > having a feature freeze on the stable branch. I urge you to follow well > established processes and not invent new processes on the fly and hold the > project hostage to those new processes. If you have concerns about the > stability of the commit, we can consider reverting from the stable branch. > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 7:11 AM Ishan Chattopadhyaya > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > What do we think about a "beta" release, to give users (including >> > *ourselves* in many cases) more time to try out 9.0 to report issues? >> +1 >> >> > It would be a shame to release Solr 9 without support for the vector based >> > index in Lucene 9. Thankfully there's a JIRA issue with a PR! >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15880 . It's as much about >> > optics as anything. I think many users are probably more at a curiosity / >> > exploratory stage with this topic but still -- Solr 9 without the ability >> > to explore this is disappointing, leaving them to consider other options >> > to scratch that itch. >> >> Fully agree with the sentiment here, David. Without the vector search >> feature, I see no other important enough feature in a 9.0 release to capture >> users' excitement. Commentators are already writing off Solr as legacy >> search [0], and such a milestone release should address some of the areas in >> which we're falling behind. >> >> If that feature is just a few weeks out, what is the need for this >> artificial rush to get 9.0 out now? >> >> [0] - https://twitter.com/jobergum/status/1476657317768749062 >> >> >> On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:15 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> branch_9x is in feature freeze! We want to stabilize, fix bugs and remove >>> blockers on that branch, not add features - unless they are agreed as a >>> blocker for the release. >>> If everyone starts pushing all kinds of new features to 9x now, it will >>> never stabilize. >>> >>>>>>>> >>> Q: But my feature is almost ready and low-risk, I can surely put >>>>>>>> >>> it on branch_9x ? >>>>>>>> >>> A: No, only blockers and bugfixes please. You can argue on dev@ >>>>>>>> >>> that your feature is a blocker >>> >>> >>> I think it all looks a bit messy and rushed. SOLR-15694 is open, PR is >>> open, with no approvals from any of the reviwers? >>> >>> Please revert on branch_9x and then "argue on dev@ that your feature is a >>> blocker". >>> >>> Jan >>> >>> 7. jan. 2022 kl. 20:09 skrev Ishan Chattopadhyaya >>> <[email protected]>: >>> >>> Since a 9.0 release branch has not been cut, I backported the SOLR-15694 to >>> branch_9x. If there are any concerns, we can discuss reverting it from >>> branch_9_0 later. >>> Thanks and regards. >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:34 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> > let it bake in main (10.0) for some time, letting more devs try it out >>>> >>>> Please define "some time". Is 3 weeks until the 9.0 release not enough? >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 10:26 PM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I think it is premature to add it to branch_9x yet. First get +1 from key >>>>> stakeholders on the PR, then let it bake in main (10.0) for some time, >>>>> letting more devs try it out. If all looks good at that point, we may >>>>> consider it, especially if the default behaviour is === 8.x. >>>>> >>>>> What do others think? >>>>> >>>>> Jan >>>>> >>>>> 7. jan. 2022 kl. 11:26 skrev Ishan Chattopadhyaya >>>>> <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>> > Btw - does Solr have any benchmarks published yet, that we can compare >>>>> > 8.11 with 9.0? Would be very useful. >>>>> >>>>> I can work on it over the weekend. I have some suites ready with me, but >>>>> not automated yet. >>>>> >>>>> > Today: Cut branch_9x and enter feature freeze on that branch >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to include SOLR-15694 (node roles) in 9.0, if that's okay with >>>>> you. It is dev complete, we're just running the tests to make sure the >>>>> failing tests are not due to our changes (and unrelated); we can commit >>>>> it over the weekend. >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 3:13 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think we are allowed by Apache policy to broadly announce >>>>>> non-official releases like nightlies. >>>>>> >>>>>> There should be more than enough in 9.0 to warrant a major release. >>>>>> Most users will be reluctant to jump on a X.0.0 release, so we can >>>>>> mature a lot in 9.0.x. >>>>>> >>>>>> Perhaps if we start authoring the Release Notes (any volunteers?), we'll >>>>>> see more clearly what we are about to relase. >>>>>> And if we can have new sexy features in 9.1 and 9.2 that even warrants >>>>>> blog posts and twitter bragging, even better :) >>>>>> >>>>>> Let's keep this release train rolling and force ourselves into getting >>>>>> this out there sooner rather than later. We're not releasing the >>>>>> reference-branch or anything, so I think a beta is not necessary, unless >>>>>> the release phase ends up in endless RCs due to tons of bugs and >>>>>> regressions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Btw - does Solr have any benchmarks published yet, that we can compare >>>>>> 8.11 with 9.0? Would be very useful. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jan >>>>>> >>>>>> 6. jan. 2022 kl. 22:24 skrev David Smiley <[email protected]>: >>>>>> >>>>>> What do we think about a "beta" release, to give users (including >>>>>> *ourselves* in many cases) more time to try out 9.0 to report issues? I >>>>>> don't think a beta release would necessitate a typical feature freeze. >>>>>> If we ultimately decline on a beta release, a counter-proposal would be >>>>>> to promote our nightly docker images everywhere (solr-users list, >>>>>> twitter, Slack) to solicit feedback. >>>>>> >>>>>> It would be a shame to release Solr 9 without support for the vector >>>>>> based index in Lucene 9. Thankfully there's a JIRA issue with a PR! >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15880 . It's as much about >>>>>> optics as anything. I think many users are probably more at a curiosity >>>>>> / exploratory stage with this topic but still -- Solr 9 without the >>>>>> ability to explore this is disappointing, leaving them to consider other >>>>>> options to scratch that itch. >>>>>> >>>>>> ~ David Smiley >>>>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer >>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 2:11 PM Timothy Potter <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> thanks Jan, PR looks good now! 😀 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 11:52 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> False alarm, I had a dirty checkout. >>>>>>>> Please see if your PR passes precommit. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jan >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > 6. jan. 2022 kl. 19:49 skrev Jan Høydahl <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Tim, I pushed a change to gradle that now uses hardcoded 9.0.0 for >>>>>>>> > tests.luceneMatchVersion. That's a stop-gap, will make it >>>>>>>> > dynamically follow the current lucene-version, but somehow my gradle >>>>>>>> > project picked up an old version of org.apache.lucene.utils.Version >>>>>>>> > class... >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Now I get a new error >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > * What went wrong: >>>>>>>> > Execution failed for task ':validateSourcePatterns'. >>>>>>>> >> Found 10 violations in source files (@author javadoc tag, svn >>>>>>>> >> keyword, tabs instead spaces). >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Jan >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> 6. jan. 2022 kl. 17:53 skrev Timothy Potter <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> Thanks for the update Jan! >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> One of my PRs (sync'd with main) is now failing precommit with: >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> 105 actionable tasks: 103 executed, 2 up-to-date >>>>>>>> >> 201FAILURE: Build failed with an exception. >>>>>>>> >> 202 >>>>>>>> >> 203* Where: >>>>>>>> >> 204Script >>>>>>>> >> '/home/runner/work/solr/solr/gradle/validation/solr.config-file-sanity.gradle' >>>>>>>> >> line: 40 >>>>>>>> >> 205 >>>>>>>> >> 206* What went wrong: >>>>>>>> >> 207Execution failed for task ':solr:validateConfigFileSanity'. >>>>>>>> >> 208> Configset does not refer to the correct luceneMatchVersion >>>>>>>> >> (10.0.0): >>>>>>>> >> /home/runner/work/solr/solr/solr/server/solr/configsets/_default/conf/solrconfig.xml >>>>>>>> >> 209 >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> Any ideas what's wrong there? >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 9:40 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> >> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> NOTICE: >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> Branch branch_9_x has been cut and versions updated to 10.0 on >>>>>>>> >>> 'main' branch. >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> This follows the plan from previous notice about 9.0 release [1]. >>>>>>>> >>> Here is what will happen: >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> Today: Cut branch_9x and enter feature freeze on that branch >>>>>>>> >>> Next few weeks: Remove blockers, prepare build & release machinery >>>>>>>> >>> February: Cut branch_9_0 and build RC1 >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> This is how we'll use the branches until we cut the branch_9_0 >>>>>>>> >>> release-branch: >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> main: All new features and bug fixes (as today) >>>>>>>> >>> branch_9x: Only backport of bugfixes and blockers for the 9.0 >>>>>>>> >>> release. >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> FAQ: >>>>>>>> >>> ------ >>>>>>>> >>> Q: Where do I put a feature intended for 9.1? >>>>>>>> >>> A: On main branch. Then in February, bulk backport to branch_9x >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> Q: Can we go to Java17 on main branch now? >>>>>>>> >>> A: Not yet, let's keep main branch as-is until branch_9_0 is cut, >>>>>>>> >>> to easen backporting >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> Q: But my feature is almost ready and low-risk, I can surely put >>>>>>>> >>> it on branch_9x ? >>>>>>>> >>> A: No, only blockers and bugfixes please. You can argue on dev@ >>>>>>>> >>> that your feature is a blocker >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> Q: How can I help with the 9.0 release? >>>>>>>> >>> A: You can check out the JIRA for blockers [2] and help fix those >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> Q: Why do we need to wait until February with cutting the release >>>>>>>> >>> branch? >>>>>>>> >>> A: We don't - if blockers are resolved and we feel close to RC1 >>>>>>>> >>> before then... >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> [1] >>>>>>>> >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/qv9n2b7jkmzr26ov5p50lc3h2dy7htzo >>>>>>>> >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12351219 >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> > > -- ----------------------------------------------------- Noble Paul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
