"LTS" typically has meaning for folks beyond just what the words say. JDK LTS. Ubuntu LTS. etc... I think it would be less confusing to stay with the stable/latest labels we have had in the past and plan ahead a bit in terms of giving notice when releases will be removed from support.
Patrick On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 3:12 AM Andor Molnar <an...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > I think that wasn’t a general plan from the community at that time, just > my opinion based on how long 3.4 was the stable release of ZooKeeper (4 > years). Since then the release schedule has become much faster and to be > honest I’m not participating in it. > > As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 is the > “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of patches that > improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for upgrade, so > announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not necessarily bad. > > As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) terms, I think > the following could also be considered for the community: > > Now: > > master > ---------- > 3.7 > 3.6 > 3.5 LTS > ---------- > 3.4 EoL > > Can become: > > master > ---------- > 3.8 LTS > 3.7 > 3.5 LTS > ---------- > 3.6 EoL > 3.4 EoL > > In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. > > What do you think? > > Andor > > > > > On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a whole, but > > maybe I have misunderstood this response: > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com> ha > >> scritto: > >> > >>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a > Hadoop > >>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe > there > >>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) > >> release. > >>> > >>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS > >>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a > timetable > >> to > >>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should you > >>> decide to EOL it. > >> > >> > >> I am sorry, > >> I forgot about such conversation. > >> > >> Can you share some pointers ? > >> > >> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 and > that > >> is willing to help. > >> > >> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention to > >> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to connect to > new > >> servers (and vice versa) > >> > >> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the > community, > >> so from your response I understand that there is such interest. > >> > >> Thanks for answering > >> > >> Enrico > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hello, > >>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. > >>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > >>>> > >>>> Key points: > >>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 > >>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade is > >>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > >>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if > >>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 > >>>> > >>>> Thoughts ? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Enrico > >>> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Andrew > > > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > > It's what we’ve earned > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > > - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > >
