Hi, 3.5 had a lot of new features that wasn't really finalized, so API changed until stable 3.5 (3.5.5). But I don't think this is the case with 3.6.0, we have complete and pretty much finalized features as far as I can tell. Also, it did confuse me that with the beta and alpha releases on 3.5 minor version jumped as well. So if we want to stick with alpha/beta qualifier, let's keep it at 3.6.0-alpha and 3.6.0-beta (not like 3.6.2-beta).
I don't know any change that would justify an "alpha" version, so maybe a beta would be better? But I'm also just fine releasing just "3.6.0". Bugfix version is zero, everyone pretty much knows what that means :) So I lean toward leaving alpha and beta out of the version. Regards, Norbert On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 2:34 PM Enrico Olivelli <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >
