Currently we don’t have a 2.0.x-branch and master is actually “2.0.1-SNAPSHOT”.
So if we do a 2.1.0 release, we will create a 2.1.x-branch based on current master, release from there. And we change master to “2.2.0-SNAPSHOT”. But we will have one problem: we will lose 2.0.x release line. There are two things I can do: 1) create a 2.0.x-branch based on v2.0.0 tag. 2) ignore it. If there is an issue with 2.0.x release, ask users to upgrade to 2.1.0. I prefer 1) but not sure if it’s the right way to make things right. Or please let me know if I misunderstood something and it’s not an issue. Btw, I am seeing the same issue with 1.x-branch. We shouldn’t have 1.x-branch. Instead, we should have 1.2.x-branch. But this is not a problem since we will not release 1.3.x. Thanks, Ethan > On Aug 7, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Ethan Li <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes thanks. > >> On Aug 7, 2019, at 10:39 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Sounds great. Remember to add your key to >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/storm/KEYS, you should be able >> to update it with an SVN client. See also >> https://www.apache.org/dev/openpgp.html#update. >> >> Den ons. 7. aug. 2019 kl. 15.05 skrev Ethan Li <[email protected]>: >> >>> I got my pgp key signed by Bryan W. Call <[email protected] <mailto: >>> [email protected]>> (Thanks to him). >>> >>> My pgp key: >>> http://pgp.surfnet.nl/pks/lookup?op=vindex&fingerprint=on&search=0xA4A672F11B5050C8 >>> < >>> http://pgp.surfnet.nl/pks/lookup?op=vindex&fingerprint=on&search=0xA4A672F11B5050C8 >>>> >>> >>> My understanding is that I am good to do release with this key now. >>> >>> >>> Here is a list of PRs that we might want to include in the new release: >>> >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3098 < >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3098> >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3096 < >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3096> >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878 < >>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878> >>> >>> >>> Please review if you get a chance. Thanks >>> >>> >>> Ethan >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Aug 1, 2019, at 4:19 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks Ethan, yes 2.1.0 makes sense. >>>> >>>> Den man. 29. jul. 2019 kl. 23.43 skrev Ethan Li < >>> [email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> It’s a good point. I will start a discussion thread for it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> For the new release, I went through the list: >>>>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20STORM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.0.1 >>>>> < >>>>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20=%20STORM%20AND%20fixVersion%20=%202.0.1 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> We introduced some new functionalities, including >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2720 < >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-2720> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3412 < >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3412> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3411 < >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3411> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3442 < >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3442> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3396 < >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3396> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3392 < >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3392> >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3395 < >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-3395> >>>>> >>>>> So I think we should release 2.1.0 rather than 2.0.1. >>>>> >>>>> There are a few pull requests we may want to review before the next >>>>> release: >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3094 < >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3094> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2990 < >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2990> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878 < >>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Ethan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 29, 2019, at 10:11 AM, Hugo Louro <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 >>>>>> >>>>>> I think it would facilitate more frequent releases to summarize in a >>> page >>>>>> the testing that all contributors/committers do in anticipation of the >>>>>> release, plus any "new" testing that may become relevant for the newer >>>>>> releases. Doing so would make it easy to create a check form or or >>> email >>>>>> template that what we feel should be done to guarantee a stable >>> release. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Hugo >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 7:15 AM Ethan Li <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks Stig. I will look into it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jul 26, 2019, at 3:06 PM, Stig Rohde Døssing < >>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think ideally we've been trying for semver, but it's been pretty >>>>> loose, >>>>>>>> e.g. there were breaking changes in one of the 1.2.x releases for >>>>>>>> storm-kafka-client. I don't know what rules we've actually been >>> using, >>>>> if >>>>>>>> any. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Semver for binary compatibility would probably be a good rule of >>> thumb. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Den fre. 26. jul. 2019 kl. 20.01 skrev Ethan Li < >>>>>>> [email protected]>: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Stig, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Do you know what’s the versioning standard we have been following >>> (to >>>>>>>>> determine a 2.0.1 release or 2.1.0 release) ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Jul 26, 2019, at 12:26 PM, Stig Rohde Døssing < >>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sounds great, thanks Ethan. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Den fre. 26. jul. 2019 kl. 19.16 skrev Ethan Li < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]>: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> It’s good idea to do more frequent release. I can run the next >>>>>>> release. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I will take a look at both PRs. Other than that, I think we should >>>>>>> also >>>>>>>>>>> get https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093 < >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/3093> in the new release. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 26, 2019, at 11:58 AM, Stig Rohde Døssing < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think we've talked about more frequent releases before. >>> Releasing >>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>>>>> versions every few months means people don't have to wait long >>> for >>>>>>>>> fixes >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> get out, and smaller releases are probably also easier for users >>> to >>>>>>> get >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> grips with (the fix list for 2.0.0 is enormous). >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> With that in mind, I think we should start looking at the next >>> 2.x >>>>>>>>>>> release >>>>>>>>>>>> (2.0.1 or 2.1.0?), since it's been a couple of months since 2.0.0 >>>>>>>>>>> released. >>>>>>>>>>>> The fix list would be >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20STORM%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.0.1 >>>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Govind and Ethan have offered to run the next release, and help >>>>>>>>> validate >>>>>>>>>>>> our release process guidelines. Would one of you have time to >>> work >>>>>>> on a >>>>>>>>>>>> release in the near future? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It would be good to take a look at currently open PRs and decide >>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>>>>>> feel need to get merged before the next release. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to see at least >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2990 >>>>>>>>>>>> merged >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2878 seems like it's close >>> to >>>>>>> be >>>>>>>>>>>> mergeable too? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >
