> >>> To be clear, if the polish involves changing the code, then you are > >>> asking for an rc2. > >> > >> The changes should be reflected in RC1 to avoid ppl having to trash > >> their Bayes data due to a data format change. This would not be very > >> kind and could scsare potential early adopters away and give the > >> feeling of this being very inmature, which it isn't.
Yes, I agree with Alex - if the change in a format of a Redis bayes database is to stay (as comitted today), it would be unkind to testers to bother them with the previous format and a need for transition. I'm sorry the work on Lua happened to coincide with Kevin's work on RC1. > > I'm not going to bore you with details but in short, that just not how > > ASF release procedures works. The rc1 is already created. Now we vote > > on it. If you don't think it should be 3.4.0 because it needs new code > > for example, vote -1 and we have to create an rc2 and repeat when it's > > ready. > > imo, we will need a RC2 (Mark?) so if that's the method -1 Yes, please Kevin, re-carve the RC2 from the current repository. In that sense here is my formal -1 on RC1 (unless we decide to ditch the change in a db format and stay with what went into RC1). Mark
