Hi, We are close to a release for 3.6.0, currently master branch is full of important features and important refactors.
On the VOTE thread for 3.5.6 it came out that we could release 3.6.0 as "ALPHA", here are my thoughts. I think we have at least these kind of "users": - Companies that run the Server on the most recent "stable" release - Companies that running a ZooKeeper cluster just because another system depends on it (HBase, Kafka,Solr, Pulsar....) - Library maintainers (Kafka, BookKeeper, HBase), they depend on a version of the client or on some feature of the server - Application developers - Big companies that maintain their own forks and/or are using the "master" version With my library maintainer hat I feel I cannot depend on some "ALPHA" version of ZooKeeper client and make my users setup an ALPHA version of the server. It happened on BookKeeper for instance, we started to depend on ZK 3.5 but as it was BETA so we needed to revert back to 3.4. I think that some similar story happened in Kafka, now that we have 3.5 with SSL support users are going to migrate. If there is no blocker issue on 3.6.0 I feel we should dare to release it as "stable", we can always suggest users and companies to try out current master and give feedback. I am new to this story of tagging as "ALPHA"/"BETA" on ZooKeeper, but as an user and library maintainer I suffered a lot that '-ALPHA' and '-BETA' suffixes. I know that ZooKeeper is the core of most of the other systems and we should not suggest to use something that it is "experimental", but as far as I know we are taking great care about being backward compatible and about the quality of our code base. Other opinions ? Enrico
