Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
The release guide [1] has a section about that. Before doing a release we check whether there are blocker issues or issues that have the to-be-released version as the fix version. If there are any those have to be resolved before going forward with the release. [1] http://beam.incubator.apache.org/contribute/release-guide/ On Wed, 26 Oct 2016 at 10:00 Maximilian Michels wrote: > For releases, legal matters have top priority, e.g. licensing issues > can really get a project into trouble. Apart from that, what about > testing various functionality of Beam with different runners before an > actual release? Also, should we have a look at the list of open issues > and decide whether we want to fix some of those for the upcoming > release? > > For example, it would have been nice to update the Flink version of > the Flink Runner to 1.1.3. Perhaps we can do that for the first minor > release :) > > -Max > > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Dan Halperin > wrote: > > Thanks JB! (et al.) Excellent suggestions. > > > > Thanks, > > Dan > > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Dan, > >> > >> No problem, MQTT and other IOs will be in the next release.. > >> > >> IMHO, it would be great to have: > >> 1. A release reminder couple of days before a release. Just to ask > >> everyone if there's no objection (something like this: > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/80de75df0115940ca402132 > >> 338b221e5dd5f669fd1bf915cd95e15c3@%3Cdev.karaf.apache.org%3E) > >> 2. A roughly release schedule on the website (something like this: > >> http://karaf.apache.org/download.html#container-schedule for instance). > >> > >> Just my $0.01 ;) > >> > >> Regards > >> JB > >> > >> > >> On 10/20/2016 06:30 PM, Dan Halperin wrote: > >> > >>> Hi JB, > >>> > >>> This is a great discussion to have! IMO, there's no special > functionality > >>> requirements for these pre-TLP releases. It's more important to make > sure > >>> we keep the process going. (I think we should start the release as > soon as > >>> possible, because it's been 2 months since the last one.) > >>> > >>> If we hold a release a week for MQTT, we'll hold it another week for > some > >>> other new feature, and then hold it again for some other new feature. > >>> > >>> Can you make a strong argument for why MQTT in particular should be > >>> release > >>> blocking? > >>> > >>> Dan > >>> > >>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 > > Thanks Aljosha !! > > Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I > would > like to include MqttIO if possible. > > Thanks ! > Regards > JB > > > > On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin > > wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > wrote: > > > > Hi, > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > >> > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > >> > > the > > > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > >> > > update it > > > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > >> > > for > > > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Aljoscha > >> > >> > > Spinning this out as a separate thread. > > > > +1 -- Sounds great to me! > > > > Dan > > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > wrote: > > > > Hi, > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > >> > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > >> > > the > > > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > >> > > update it > > > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > >> > > for > > > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Aljoscha > >> > >> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >> > > wrote: > > > >> > >> Hi, > >>> > >>> well done. > >>> > >>> As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) > >>> > >>> Regards > >>> JB > >>> > >>> On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > >>> > Hi everybody, > As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document > > >>> the > > > >> process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release > > >>> managers, > >> > >>> and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project > > >>> graduation > > > >> guidelines. > > Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did > > >>> for the > > > >> first
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
For releases, legal matters have top priority, e.g. licensing issues can really get a project into trouble. Apart from that, what about testing various functionality of Beam with different runners before an actual release? Also, should we have a look at the list of open issues and decide whether we want to fix some of those for the upcoming release? For example, it would have been nice to update the Flink version of the Flink Runner to 1.1.3. Perhaps we can do that for the first minor release :) -Max On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Dan Halperin wrote: > Thanks JB! (et al.) Excellent suggestions. > > Thanks, > Dan > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré > wrote: > >> Hi Dan, >> >> No problem, MQTT and other IOs will be in the next release.. >> >> IMHO, it would be great to have: >> 1. A release reminder couple of days before a release. Just to ask >> everyone if there's no objection (something like this: >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/80de75df0115940ca402132 >> 338b221e5dd5f669fd1bf915cd95e15c3@%3Cdev.karaf.apache.org%3E) >> 2. A roughly release schedule on the website (something like this: >> http://karaf.apache.org/download.html#container-schedule for instance). >> >> Just my $0.01 ;) >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> >> On 10/20/2016 06:30 PM, Dan Halperin wrote: >> >>> Hi JB, >>> >>> This is a great discussion to have! IMO, there's no special functionality >>> requirements for these pre-TLP releases. It's more important to make sure >>> we keep the process going. (I think we should start the release as soon as >>> possible, because it's been 2 months since the last one.) >>> >>> If we hold a release a week for MQTT, we'll hold it another week for some >>> other new feature, and then hold it again for some other new feature. >>> >>> Can you make a strong argument for why MQTT in particular should be >>> release >>> blocking? >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> wrote: >>> >>> +1 Thanks Aljosha !! Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I would like to include MqttIO if possible. Thanks ! Regards JB On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > wrote: > > Hi, >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! >> >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for >> > the > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and >> > update it > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread >> > for > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? >> >> Cheers, >> Aljoscha >> >> > Spinning this out as a separate thread. > > +1 -- Sounds great to me! > > Dan > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > wrote: > > Hi, >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! >> >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for >> > the > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and >> > update it > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread >> > for > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? >> >> Cheers, >> Aljoscha >> >> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > wrote: > >> >> Hi, >>> >>> well done. >>> >>> As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: >>> Hi everybody, As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document >>> the > >> process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release >>> managers, >> >>> and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project >>> graduation > >> guidelines. Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did >>> for the > >> first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd >>> invite > >> everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the >>> pull > >> request >>> itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. Thanks, Davor [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 >>> -- >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> jbono...@apache.org >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>> >>> >> >>> >> -- >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> jbono...@apache.org >> http://blog.nanthrax.net >> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
Thanks JB! (et al.) Excellent suggestions. Thanks, Dan On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi Dan, > > No problem, MQTT and other IOs will be in the next release.. > > IMHO, it would be great to have: > 1. A release reminder couple of days before a release. Just to ask > everyone if there's no objection (something like this: > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/80de75df0115940ca402132 > 338b221e5dd5f669fd1bf915cd95e15c3@%3Cdev.karaf.apache.org%3E) > 2. A roughly release schedule on the website (something like this: > http://karaf.apache.org/download.html#container-schedule for instance). > > Just my $0.01 ;) > > Regards > JB > > > On 10/20/2016 06:30 PM, Dan Halperin wrote: > >> Hi JB, >> >> This is a great discussion to have! IMO, there's no special functionality >> requirements for these pre-TLP releases. It's more important to make sure >> we keep the process going. (I think we should start the release as soon as >> possible, because it's been 2 months since the last one.) >> >> If we hold a release a week for MQTT, we'll hold it another week for some >> other new feature, and then hold it again for some other new feature. >> >> Can you make a strong argument for why MQTT in particular should be >> release >> blocking? >> >> Dan >> >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> wrote: >> >> +1 >>> >>> Thanks Aljosha !! >>> >>> Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I would >>> like to include MqttIO if possible. >>> >>> Thanks ! >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> >>> >>> On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin >>> >>> wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: Hi, > thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > the > next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > update it > with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > for > this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > Cheers, > Aljoscha > > Spinning this out as a separate thread. +1 -- Sounds great to me! Dan On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: Hi, > thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > the > next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > update it > with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > for > this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > Cheers, > Aljoscha > > On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré > wrote: > > Hi, >> >> well done. >> >> As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: >> >>> Hi everybody, >>> As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document >>> >> the > process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release >>> >> managers, > >> and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project >>> >> graduation > guidelines. >>> >>> Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did >>> >> for the > first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd >>> >> invite > everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the >>> >> pull > request >> >>> itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Davor >>> >>> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 >>> >>> >> -- >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> jbono...@apache.org >> http://blog.nanthrax.net >> Talend - http://www.talend.com >> >> > >>> >> > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > jbono...@apache.org > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
+1 for the release. We have plenty of fixes in and users have already asked for a new release. -Max On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi Aljoscha, > > OK for me, you can go ahead ;) > > Thanks again to tackle this release ! > > Regards > JB > > > On 10/21/2016 08:51 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: >> >> +1 @JB >> >> We should definitely keep that in mind for the next releases. I think this >> one is now sufficiently announced so I'll get started on the process. >> (Which will take me a while since I have to do all the initial setup.) >> >> >> >> On Fri, 21 Oct 2016 at 06:32 Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >> >>> Hi Dan, >>> >>> No problem, MQTT and other IOs will be in the next release.. >>> >>> IMHO, it would be great to have: >>> 1. A release reminder couple of days before a release. Just to ask >>> everyone if there's no objection (something like this: >>> >>> >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/80de75df0115940ca402132338b221e5dd5f669fd1bf915cd95e15c3@%3Cdev.karaf.apache.org%3E >>> ) >>> 2. A roughly release schedule on the website (something like this: >>> http://karaf.apache.org/download.html#container-schedule for instance). >>> >>> Just my $0.01 ;) >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> On 10/20/2016 06:30 PM, Dan Halperin wrote: Hi JB, This is a great discussion to have! IMO, there's no special functionality requirements for these pre-TLP releases. It's more important to make sure we keep the process going. (I think we should start the release as soon >>> >>> as possible, because it's been 2 months since the last one.) If we hold a release a week for MQTT, we'll hold it another week for some other new feature, and then hold it again for some other new feature. Can you make a strong argument for why MQTT in particular should be >>> >>> release blocking? Dan On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > +1 > > Thanks Aljosha !! > > Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I >>> >>> would > > like to include MqttIO if possible. > > Thanks ! > Regards > JB > > > > On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin >>> >>> > > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek >> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! >>> >>> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for >> >> the >>> >>> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and >> >> update it >>> >>> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread >> >> for >>> >>> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Aljoscha >>> >> >> Spinning this out as a separate thread. >> >> +1 -- Sounds great to me! >> >> Dan >> >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek >> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! >>> >>> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for >> >> the >>> >>> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and >> >> update it >>> >>> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread >> >> for >>> >>> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Aljoscha >>> >>> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, well done. As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) Regards JB On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > > Hi everybody, > As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document >> >> the > > process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release >>> >>> managers, > > and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project >> >> graduation > > guidelines. > > Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did >> >> for the > > first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd >> >> invite > > everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the >> >> pull request > > itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. > > Thanks, > Davor > > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 > -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
Hi Aljoscha, OK for me, you can go ahead ;) Thanks again to tackle this release ! Regards JB On 10/21/2016 08:51 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: +1 @JB We should definitely keep that in mind for the next releases. I think this one is now sufficiently announced so I'll get started on the process. (Which will take me a while since I have to do all the initial setup.) On Fri, 21 Oct 2016 at 06:32 Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: Hi Dan, No problem, MQTT and other IOs will be in the next release.. IMHO, it would be great to have: 1. A release reminder couple of days before a release. Just to ask everyone if there's no objection (something like this: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/80de75df0115940ca402132338b221e5dd5f669fd1bf915cd95e15c3@%3Cdev.karaf.apache.org%3E ) 2. A roughly release schedule on the website (something like this: http://karaf.apache.org/download.html#container-schedule for instance). Just my $0.01 ;) Regards JB On 10/20/2016 06:30 PM, Dan Halperin wrote: Hi JB, This is a great discussion to have! IMO, there's no special functionality requirements for these pre-TLP releases. It's more important to make sure we keep the process going. (I think we should start the release as soon as possible, because it's been 2 months since the last one.) If we hold a release a week for MQTT, we'll hold it another week for some other new feature, and then hold it again for some other new feature. Can you make a strong argument for why MQTT in particular should be release blocking? Dan On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: +1 Thanks Aljosha !! Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I would like to include MqttIO if possible. Thanks ! Regards JB On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin wrote: On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: Hi, thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for the next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and update it with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread for this or is it ok of nobody objects here? Cheers, Aljoscha Spinning this out as a separate thread. +1 -- Sounds great to me! Dan On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: Hi, thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for the next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and update it with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread for this or is it ok of nobody objects here? Cheers, Aljoscha On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: Hi, well done. As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) Regards JB On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: Hi everybody, As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document the process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release managers, and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project graduation guidelines. Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did for the first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd invite everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the pull request itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. Thanks, Davor [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
+1 @JB We should definitely keep that in mind for the next releases. I think this one is now sufficiently announced so I'll get started on the process. (Which will take me a while since I have to do all the initial setup.) On Fri, 21 Oct 2016 at 06:32 Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > Hi Dan, > > No problem, MQTT and other IOs will be in the next release.. > > IMHO, it would be great to have: > 1. A release reminder couple of days before a release. Just to ask > everyone if there's no objection (something like this: > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/80de75df0115940ca402132338b221e5dd5f669fd1bf915cd95e15c3@%3Cdev.karaf.apache.org%3E > ) > 2. A roughly release schedule on the website (something like this: > http://karaf.apache.org/download.html#container-schedule for instance). > > Just my $0.01 ;) > > Regards > JB > > On 10/20/2016 06:30 PM, Dan Halperin wrote: > > Hi JB, > > > > This is a great discussion to have! IMO, there's no special functionality > > requirements for these pre-TLP releases. It's more important to make sure > > we keep the process going. (I think we should start the release as soon > as > > possible, because it's been 2 months since the last one.) > > > > If we hold a release a week for MQTT, we'll hold it another week for some > > other new feature, and then hold it again for some other new feature. > > > > Can you make a strong argument for why MQTT in particular should be > release > > blocking? > > > > Dan > > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > >> Thanks Aljosha !! > >> > >> Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I > would > >> like to include MqttIO if possible. > >> > >> Thanks ! > >> Regards > >> JB > >> > >> > >> > >> On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin > > >> wrote: > >>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > >>> > >>> wrote: > >>> > Hi, > thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > >>> the > next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > >>> update it > with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > >>> for > this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > Cheers, > Aljoscha > > >>> > >>> Spinning this out as a separate thread. > >>> > >>> +1 -- Sounds great to me! > >>> > >>> Dan > >>> > >>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > >>> > >>> wrote: > >>> > Hi, > thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > >>> the > next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > >>> update it > with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > >>> for > this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > Cheers, > Aljoscha > > On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >>> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > well done. > > > > As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > >> Hi everybody, > >> As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document > >>> the > >> process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release > managers, > >> and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project > >>> graduation > >> guidelines. > >> > >> Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did > >>> for the > >> first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd > >>> invite > >> everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the > >>> pull > > request > >> itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Davor > >> > >> [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 > >> > > > > -- > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > jbono...@apache.org > > http://blog.nanthrax.net > > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > > > >> > > > > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > jbono...@apache.org > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
Hi Dan, No problem, MQTT and other IOs will be in the next release.. IMHO, it would be great to have: 1. A release reminder couple of days before a release. Just to ask everyone if there's no objection (something like this: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/80de75df0115940ca402132338b221e5dd5f669fd1bf915cd95e15c3@%3Cdev.karaf.apache.org%3E) 2. A roughly release schedule on the website (something like this: http://karaf.apache.org/download.html#container-schedule for instance). Just my $0.01 ;) Regards JB On 10/20/2016 06:30 PM, Dan Halperin wrote: Hi JB, This is a great discussion to have! IMO, there's no special functionality requirements for these pre-TLP releases. It's more important to make sure we keep the process going. (I think we should start the release as soon as possible, because it's been 2 months since the last one.) If we hold a release a week for MQTT, we'll hold it another week for some other new feature, and then hold it again for some other new feature. Can you make a strong argument for why MQTT in particular should be release blocking? Dan On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: +1 Thanks Aljosha !! Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I would like to include MqttIO if possible. Thanks ! Regards JB On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin wrote: On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: Hi, thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for the next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and update it with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread for this or is it ok of nobody objects here? Cheers, Aljoscha Spinning this out as a separate thread. +1 -- Sounds great to me! Dan On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: Hi, thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for the next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and update it with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread for this or is it ok of nobody objects here? Cheers, Aljoscha On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: Hi, well done. As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) Regards JB On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: Hi everybody, As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document the process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release managers, and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project graduation guidelines. Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did for the first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd invite everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the pull request itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. Thanks, Davor [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
Aljoscha, I'm very interested in hearing how easy it is, or how fast we think it could get, from your perspective as first time release manager. The more frequent releases we have (eventually minor or patch version only) the less these concerns impact users. On Thu, Oct 20, 2016, 10:26 Jesse Anderson wrote: > +1 to Davor's. I'd really like to see an 0.3.0 release because there have > been big API changes between 0.2.0 and 0.3.0 like the DoFN changes. It'd be > nice to stop pointing people to HEAD and back to a release. > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 10:17 AM Davor Bonaci > wrote: > > > It's been a while since the last release, and I think we have accumulated > > plenty of improvements across the board [1]. There are new IOs to be > > released, performance improvements, and a ton of fixes. > > > > As a general principle, I'm always advocating for delaying releases when > > there are outstanding bug fixes. For new features, however, I'm usually > on > > the fence. It happens sometimes that new features are rushed to make a > > release, then we discover important issues later on, and sometimes regret > > the decision. > > > > Of course, UnboundedSource for the SparkRunner and MqttIo would be > > additional great improvements, and we should get that out to our users as > > soon as possible too. > > > > In this particular case, I think it is perfectly reasonable either to: > > * try to get 0.3.0 out now and follow it quickly with 0.4.0, as soon as > > these improvements are ready, or > > * delay the release, but with a specific time box of a few days. > > > > I'd give some preference to the first option now, since it is important > to > > keep a cadence of releases during incubation and build experience with > the > > process. If we were post-graduation, I'd almost certainly give a > preference > > to the second approach. > > > > Davor > > > > [1] > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12338051 > > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Amit Sela wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > I would like to have my standing PRs merged please - they should > provide > > > support for UnboundedSource for the SparkRunner. > > > If it won't be ready for merge at the beginning of next week, don't > hold > > > for me. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Amit > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:27 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > Thanks Aljosha !! > > > > > > > > Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I > > would > > > > like to include MqttIO if possible. > > > > > > > > Thanks ! > > > > Regards > > > > JB > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > > > >> > > > > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager > for > > > > >the > > > > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > > > > >update it > > > > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new > thread > > > > >for > > > > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > > > >> > > > > >> Cheers, > > > > >> Aljoscha > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >Spinning this out as a separate thread. > > > > > > > > > >+1 -- Sounds great to me! > > > > > > > > > >Dan > > > > > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > > > >> > > > > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager > for > > > > >the > > > > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > > > > >update it > > > > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new > thread > > > > >for > > > > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > > > >> > > > > >> Cheers, > > > > >> Aljoscha > > > > >> > > > > >> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > j...@nanthrax.net> > > > > >wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > Hi, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > well done. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Regards > > > > >> > JB > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > > > > >> > > Hi everybody, > > > > >> > > As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to > document > > > > >the > > > > >> > > process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release > > > > >> managers, > > > > >> > > and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project > > > > >graduation > > > > >> > > guidelines. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we > did > > > > >for the > > > > >> > > first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd > > > > >invite > > > > >> > > everyone interes
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
+1 to Davor's. I'd really like to see an 0.3.0 release because there have been big API changes between 0.2.0 and 0.3.0 like the DoFN changes. It'd be nice to stop pointing people to HEAD and back to a release. On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 10:17 AM Davor Bonaci wrote: > It's been a while since the last release, and I think we have accumulated > plenty of improvements across the board [1]. There are new IOs to be > released, performance improvements, and a ton of fixes. > > As a general principle, I'm always advocating for delaying releases when > there are outstanding bug fixes. For new features, however, I'm usually on > the fence. It happens sometimes that new features are rushed to make a > release, then we discover important issues later on, and sometimes regret > the decision. > > Of course, UnboundedSource for the SparkRunner and MqttIo would be > additional great improvements, and we should get that out to our users as > soon as possible too. > > In this particular case, I think it is perfectly reasonable either to: > * try to get 0.3.0 out now and follow it quickly with 0.4.0, as soon as > these improvements are ready, or > * delay the release, but with a specific time box of a few days. > > I'd give some preference to the first option now, since it is important to > keep a cadence of releases during incubation and build experience with the > process. If we were post-graduation, I'd almost certainly give a preference > to the second approach. > > Davor > > [1] > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12338051 > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Amit Sela wrote: > > > +1 > > > > I would like to have my standing PRs merged please - they should provide > > support for UnboundedSource for the SparkRunner. > > If it won't be ready for merge at the beginning of next week, don't hold > > for me. > > > > Thanks, > > Amit > > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:27 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > Thanks Aljosha !! > > > > > > Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I > would > > > like to include MqttIO if possible. > > > > > > Thanks ! > > > Regards > > > JB > > > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin > > > > > wrote: > > > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > > >> > > > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > > > >the > > > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > > > >update it > > > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > > > >for > > > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > > >> > > > >> Cheers, > > > >> Aljoscha > > > >> > > > > > > > >Spinning this out as a separate thread. > > > > > > > >+1 -- Sounds great to me! > > > > > > > >Dan > > > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > > >> > > > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > > > >the > > > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > > > >update it > > > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > > > >for > > > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > > >> > > > >> Cheers, > > > >> Aljoscha > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > > >wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Hi, > > > >> > > > > >> > well done. > > > >> > > > > >> > As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) > > > >> > > > > >> > Regards > > > >> > JB > > > >> > > > > >> > On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > > > >> > > Hi everybody, > > > >> > > As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document > > > >the > > > >> > > process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release > > > >> managers, > > > >> > > and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project > > > >graduation > > > >> > > guidelines. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did > > > >for the > > > >> > > first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd > > > >invite > > > >> > > everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the > > > >pull > > > >> > request > > > >> > > itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Thanks, > > > >> > > Davor > > > >> > > > > > >> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > -- > > > >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > > >> > jbono...@apache.org > > > >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net > > > >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
I have no objection either way. My standing PRs will either make or not. I'm definitely for a quick release of 0.4.0 afterwards. On Thu, Oct 20, 2016, 20:17 Davor Bonaci wrote: > It's been a while since the last release, and I think we have accumulated > plenty of improvements across the board [1]. There are new IOs to be > released, performance improvements, and a ton of fixes. > > As a general principle, I'm always advocating for delaying releases when > there are outstanding bug fixes. For new features, however, I'm usually on > the fence. It happens sometimes that new features are rushed to make a > release, then we discover important issues later on, and sometimes regret > the decision. > > Of course, UnboundedSource for the SparkRunner and MqttIo would be > additional great improvements, and we should get that out to our users as > soon as possible too. > > In this particular case, I think it is perfectly reasonable either to: > * try to get 0.3.0 out now and follow it quickly with 0.4.0, as soon as > these improvements are ready, or > * delay the release, but with a specific time box of a few days. > > I'd give some preference to the first option now, since it is important to > keep a cadence of releases during incubation and build experience with the > process. If we were post-graduation, I'd almost certainly give a preference > to the second approach. > > Davor > > [1] > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12338051 > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Amit Sela wrote: > > > +1 > > > > I would like to have my standing PRs merged please - they should provide > > support for UnboundedSource for the SparkRunner. > > If it won't be ready for merge at the beginning of next week, don't hold > > for me. > > > > Thanks, > > Amit > > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:27 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > wrote: > > > > > +1 > > > > > > Thanks Aljosha !! > > > > > > Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I > would > > > like to include MqttIO if possible. > > > > > > Thanks ! > > > Regards > > > JB > > > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin > > > > > wrote: > > > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > > >> > > > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > > > >the > > > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > > > >update it > > > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > > > >for > > > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > > >> > > > >> Cheers, > > > >> Aljoscha > > > >> > > > > > > > >Spinning this out as a separate thread. > > > > > > > >+1 -- Sounds great to me! > > > > > > > >Dan > > > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > > >> > > > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > > > >the > > > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > > > >update it > > > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > > > >for > > > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > > >> > > > >> Cheers, > > > >> Aljoscha > > > >> > > > >> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > > >wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Hi, > > > >> > > > > >> > well done. > > > >> > > > > >> > As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) > > > >> > > > > >> > Regards > > > >> > JB > > > >> > > > > >> > On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > > > >> > > Hi everybody, > > > >> > > As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document > > > >the > > > >> > > process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release > > > >> managers, > > > >> > > and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project > > > >graduation > > > >> > > guidelines. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did > > > >for the > > > >> > > first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd > > > >invite > > > >> > > everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the > > > >pull > > > >> > request > > > >> > > itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Thanks, > > > >> > > Davor > > > >> > > > > > >> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > -- > > > >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > > >> > jbono...@apache.org > > > >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net > > > >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
It's been a while since the last release, and I think we have accumulated plenty of improvements across the board [1]. There are new IOs to be released, performance improvements, and a ton of fixes. As a general principle, I'm always advocating for delaying releases when there are outstanding bug fixes. For new features, however, I'm usually on the fence. It happens sometimes that new features are rushed to make a release, then we discover important issues later on, and sometimes regret the decision. Of course, UnboundedSource for the SparkRunner and MqttIo would be additional great improvements, and we should get that out to our users as soon as possible too. In this particular case, I think it is perfectly reasonable either to: * try to get 0.3.0 out now and follow it quickly with 0.4.0, as soon as these improvements are ready, or * delay the release, but with a specific time box of a few days. I'd give some preference to the first option now, since it is important to keep a cadence of releases during incubation and build experience with the process. If we were post-graduation, I'd almost certainly give a preference to the second approach. Davor [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12338051 On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Amit Sela wrote: > +1 > > I would like to have my standing PRs merged please - they should provide > support for UnboundedSource for the SparkRunner. > If it won't be ready for merge at the beginning of next week, don't hold > for me. > > Thanks, > Amit > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:27 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Thanks Aljosha !! > > > > Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I would > > like to include MqttIO if possible. > > > > Thanks ! > > Regards > > JB > > > > > > > > On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin > > > wrote: > > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > >> > > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > > >the > > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > > >update it > > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > > >for > > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Aljoscha > > >> > > > > > >Spinning this out as a separate thread. > > > > > >+1 -- Sounds great to me! > > > > > >Dan > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > >> > > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > > >the > > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > > >update it > > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > > >for > > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> Aljoscha > > >> > > >> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > >wrote: > > >> > > >> > Hi, > > >> > > > >> > well done. > > >> > > > >> > As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) > > >> > > > >> > Regards > > >> > JB > > >> > > > >> > On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > > >> > > Hi everybody, > > >> > > As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document > > >the > > >> > > process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release > > >> managers, > > >> > > and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project > > >graduation > > >> > > guidelines. > > >> > > > > >> > > Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did > > >for the > > >> > > first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd > > >invite > > >> > > everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the > > >pull > > >> > request > > >> > > itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. > > >> > > > > >> > > Thanks, > > >> > > Davor > > >> > > > > >> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > >> > jbono...@apache.org > > >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net > > >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > >> > > > >> > > >
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
+1 I would like to have my standing PRs merged please - they should provide support for UnboundedSource for the SparkRunner. If it won't be ready for merge at the beginning of next week, don't hold for me. Thanks, Amit On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 7:27 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > +1 > > Thanks Aljosha !! > > Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I would > like to include MqttIO if possible. > > Thanks ! > Regards > JB > > > > On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin > wrote: > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > >> > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > >the > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > >update it > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > >for > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Aljoscha > >> > > > >Spinning this out as a separate thread. > > > >+1 -- Sounds great to me! > > > >Dan > > > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > >wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > >> > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > >the > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > >update it > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > >for > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Aljoscha > >> > >> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >wrote: > >> > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > well done. > >> > > >> > As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) > >> > > >> > Regards > >> > JB > >> > > >> > On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > >> > > Hi everybody, > >> > > As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document > >the > >> > > process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release > >> managers, > >> > > and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project > >graduation > >> > > guidelines. > >> > > > >> > > Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did > >for the > >> > > first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd > >invite > >> > > everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the > >pull > >> > request > >> > > itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. > >> > > > >> > > Thanks, > >> > > Davor > >> > > > >> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 > >> > > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >> > jbono...@apache.org > >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net > >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com > >> > > >> >
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
Hi JB, This is a great discussion to have! IMO, there's no special functionality requirements for these pre-TLP releases. It's more important to make sure we keep the process going. (I think we should start the release as soon as possible, because it's been 2 months since the last one.) If we hold a release a week for MQTT, we'll hold it another week for some other new feature, and then hold it again for some other new feature. Can you make a strong argument for why MQTT in particular should be release blocking? Dan On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 9:26 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > +1 > > Thanks Aljosha !! > > Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I would > like to include MqttIO if possible. > > Thanks ! > Regards > JB > > > > On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin > wrote: > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > > wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > >> > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > >the > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > >update it > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > >for > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Aljoscha > >> > > > >Spinning this out as a separate thread. > > > >+1 -- Sounds great to me! > > > >Dan > > > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > > >wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > >> > >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for > >the > >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and > >update it > >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread > >for > >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Aljoscha > >> > >> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >wrote: > >> > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > well done. > >> > > >> > As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) > >> > > >> > Regards > >> > JB > >> > > >> > On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > >> > > Hi everybody, > >> > > As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document > >the > >> > > process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release > >> managers, > >> > > and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project > >graduation > >> > > guidelines. > >> > > > >> > > Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did > >for the > >> > > first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd > >invite > >> > > everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the > >pull > >> > request > >> > > itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. > >> > > > >> > > Thanks, > >> > > Davor > >> > > > >> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 > >> > > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > >> > jbono...@apache.org > >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net > >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com > >> > > >> >
Re: Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
+1 Thanks Aljosha !! Do you mind to wait the week end or Monday to start the release ? I would like to include MqttIO if possible. Thanks ! Regards JB On Oct 20, 2016, 18:07, at 18:07, Dan Halperin wrote: >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > > wrote: > >> Hi, >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! >> >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for >the >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and >update it >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread >for >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? >> >> Cheers, >> Aljoscha >> > >Spinning this out as a separate thread. > >+1 -- Sounds great to me! > >Dan > >On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek > >wrote: > >> Hi, >> thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! >> >> If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for >the >> next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and >update it >> with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread >for >> this or is it ok of nobody objects here? >> >> Cheers, >> Aljoscha >> >> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré >wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > well done. >> > >> > As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) >> > >> > Regards >> > JB >> > >> > On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: >> > > Hi everybody, >> > > As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document >the >> > > process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release >> managers, >> > > and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project >graduation >> > > guidelines. >> > > >> > > Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did >for the >> > > first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd >invite >> > > everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the >pull >> > request >> > > itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Davor >> > > >> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> > jbono...@apache.org >> > http://blog.nanthrax.net >> > Talend - http://www.talend.com >> > >>
Start of release 0.3.0-incubating
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > Hi, > thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for the > next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and update it > with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread for > this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > Cheers, > Aljoscha > Spinning this out as a separate thread. +1 -- Sounds great to me! Dan On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: > Hi, > thanks for taking the time and writing this extensive doc! > > If no-one is against this I would like to be the release manager for the > next (0.3.0-incubating) release. I would work with the guide and update it > with anything that I learn along the way. Should I open a new thread for > this or is it ok of nobody objects here? > > Cheers, > Aljoscha > > On Thu, 20 Oct 2016 at 07:10 Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > well done. > > > > As already discussed, it looks good to me ;) > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On 10/20/2016 01:24 AM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > > > Hi everybody, > > > As a project, I think we should have a Release Guide to document the > > > process, have consistent releases, on-board additional release > managers, > > > and generally share knowledge. It is also one of the project graduation > > > guidelines. > > > > > > Dan and I wrote a draft version, documenting the process we did for the > > > first two releases. It is currently in a pull request [1]. I'd invite > > > everyone interested to take a peek and comment, either on the pull > > request > > > itself or here on mailing list, as appropriate. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Davor > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/49 > > > > > > > -- > > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > > jbono...@apache.org > > http://blog.nanthrax.net > > Talend - http://www.talend.com > > >
