Re: [DISCUSS] Druid 0.23 release
Thank you, Suneet. On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 9:46 PM Suneet Saldanha wrote: > Agreed. Naming is hard, and I wouldn't want to slow down this release > trying to get > consensus on the correct versioning scheme. They all seem to have merits. > I will start > another thread to discuss this so we will have a decision by the time the > next release > rolls around. > > On 2022/05/27 02:57:39 rahul gidwani wrote: > > What about a 1.0 release? I think there is no backwards compatibility > promised until Druid gets to 1.0+. I think it would be really helpful to > customers to start making upgrades rollable and guaranteeing compatibility > between minor versions. Any plans for this to happen in the near future? > > > > > On May 26, 2022, at 7:16 PM, Gian Merlino wrote: > > > > > > I'm supportive of changing the versioning to something without the > leading > > > zero in the next release where this is practical. If it's the one after > > > 0.23.0, then I would go with 24.0. IMO, going with 1.0 would send a > message > > > that this is the first mature release. But that isn't the case: we have > > > been doing mature releases for a long time now. Going with 24.0 is > clearer > > > in that regard. > > > > > > Happy to repeat this opinion on a new thread too :) > > > > > >> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 6:49 PM Frank Chen > wrote: > > >> > > >> For 0.23, I don't think we need to make changes because I think it > may take > > >> us some time to reach an agreement on the naming. > > >> > > >> We can start a new thread to discuss the versioning schema. > > >> > > >> > > >> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 8:19 PM Abhishek Agarwal < > > >> abhishek.agar...@imply.io> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> We should definitely move away from the `0.xx` versioning scheme we > have > > >>> been using. However, the next version that we pick up is debatable. > > >> `23.x` > > >>> seems an odd jump from `0.23`. Can we increment the version to `1.x` > > >> maybe? > > >>> I also like the idea of using Yeah and Month that Frank has > suggested. > > >>> > > >>> I don't think that 0.23 is the right release to make this change > though. > > >>> 0.23 has already been delayed because of CVE investigations and bug > > >> fixes. > > >>> I would like to get this release out of the door as soon as possible. > > >>> > > >>>> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 2:40 PM Frank Chen > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> I agree. > > >>>> > > >>>> This is also a question that I want to ask why the version is still > > >> 0.xx > > >>>> which gives many people a hint that Druid is still under mature. > > >>>> > > >>>> There are many versioning schemas. One popular way is combining the > > >>> release > > >>>> year and month in the version. > > >>>> For example, if we're going to release a version in May this year, > the > > >>> main > > >>>> version can be 22.5. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> Versioning is one thing, LTS strategy should also be clear. > > >>>> Since we're going to release several versions a year, we should > plan in > > >>>> advance which one should be scheduled as a LTS version and maintain > it > > >>> for > > >>>> a period of time if there are some vital bugs and security issues. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 1:21 PM Suneet Saldanha > > >>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hi all, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I've been thinking that we should consider re-branding this release > > >> as > > >>>>> the Druid 23.0 instead of 0.23 release. I think this is appropriate > > >>>> because > > >>>>> typically a `0.XX` software version implies that the software is in > > >>> it's > > >>>>> infancy. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Druid is quite mature, and we've been putting good guardrails in > > >> place > > >>> to > > >>>>> detect and preven
Re: [DISCUSS] Druid 0.23 release
Agreed. Naming is hard, and I wouldn't want to slow down this release trying to get consensus on the correct versioning scheme. They all seem to have merits. I will start another thread to discuss this so we will have a decision by the time the next release rolls around. On 2022/05/27 02:57:39 rahul gidwani wrote: > What about a 1.0 release? I think there is no backwards compatibility > promised until Druid gets to 1.0+. I think it would be really helpful to > customers to start making upgrades rollable and guaranteeing compatibility > between minor versions. Any plans for this to happen in the near future? > > > On May 26, 2022, at 7:16 PM, Gian Merlino wrote: > > > > I'm supportive of changing the versioning to something without the leading > > zero in the next release where this is practical. If it's the one after > > 0.23.0, then I would go with 24.0. IMO, going with 1.0 would send a message > > that this is the first mature release. But that isn't the case: we have > > been doing mature releases for a long time now. Going with 24.0 is clearer > > in that regard. > > > > Happy to repeat this opinion on a new thread too :) > > > >> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 6:49 PM Frank Chen wrote: > >> > >> For 0.23, I don't think we need to make changes because I think it may take > >> us some time to reach an agreement on the naming. > >> > >> We can start a new thread to discuss the versioning schema. > >> > >> > >> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 8:19 PM Abhishek Agarwal < > >> abhishek.agar...@imply.io> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> We should definitely move away from the `0.xx` versioning scheme we have > >>> been using. However, the next version that we pick up is debatable. > >> `23.x` > >>> seems an odd jump from `0.23`. Can we increment the version to `1.x` > >> maybe? > >>> I also like the idea of using Yeah and Month that Frank has suggested. > >>> > >>> I don't think that 0.23 is the right release to make this change though. > >>> 0.23 has already been delayed because of CVE investigations and bug > >> fixes. > >>> I would like to get this release out of the door as soon as possible. > >>> > >>>> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 2:40 PM Frank Chen wrote: > >>> > >>>> I agree. > >>>> > >>>> This is also a question that I want to ask why the version is still > >> 0.xx > >>>> which gives many people a hint that Druid is still under mature. > >>>> > >>>> There are many versioning schemas. One popular way is combining the > >>> release > >>>> year and month in the version. > >>>> For example, if we're going to release a version in May this year, the > >>> main > >>>> version can be 22.5. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Versioning is one thing, LTS strategy should also be clear. > >>>> Since we're going to release several versions a year, we should plan in > >>>> advance which one should be scheduled as a LTS version and maintain it > >>> for > >>>> a period of time if there are some vital bugs and security issues. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 1:21 PM Suneet Saldanha > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi all, > >>>>> > >>>>> I've been thinking that we should consider re-branding this release > >> as > >>>>> the Druid 23.0 instead of 0.23 release. I think this is appropriate > >>>> because > >>>>> typically a `0.XX` software version implies that the software is in > >>> it's > >>>>> infancy. > >>>>> > >>>>> Druid is quite mature, and we've been putting good guardrails in > >> place > >>> to > >>>>> detect and prevent breaking API changes in each release. Druid has > >> also > >>>>> been running in production clusters for many different use cases for > >>>> quite > >>>>> some > >>>>> time now. I think version 23.0 is more in line with the maturity of > >> the > >>>>> project. > >>>>> > >>>>> Is there a reason not to change the version for the next release? Any > >>>>> other thoughts? > >>
Re: [DISCUSS] Druid 0.23 release
What about a 1.0 release? I think there is no backwards compatibility promised until Druid gets to 1.0+. I think it would be really helpful to customers to start making upgrades rollable and guaranteeing compatibility between minor versions. Any plans for this to happen in the near future? > On May 26, 2022, at 7:16 PM, Gian Merlino wrote: > > I'm supportive of changing the versioning to something without the leading > zero in the next release where this is practical. If it's the one after > 0.23.0, then I would go with 24.0. IMO, going with 1.0 would send a message > that this is the first mature release. But that isn't the case: we have > been doing mature releases for a long time now. Going with 24.0 is clearer > in that regard. > > Happy to repeat this opinion on a new thread too :) > >> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 6:49 PM Frank Chen wrote: >> >> For 0.23, I don't think we need to make changes because I think it may take >> us some time to reach an agreement on the naming. >> >> We can start a new thread to discuss the versioning schema. >> >> >> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 8:19 PM Abhishek Agarwal < >> abhishek.agar...@imply.io> >> wrote: >> >>> We should definitely move away from the `0.xx` versioning scheme we have >>> been using. However, the next version that we pick up is debatable. >> `23.x` >>> seems an odd jump from `0.23`. Can we increment the version to `1.x` >> maybe? >>> I also like the idea of using Yeah and Month that Frank has suggested. >>> >>> I don't think that 0.23 is the right release to make this change though. >>> 0.23 has already been delayed because of CVE investigations and bug >> fixes. >>> I would like to get this release out of the door as soon as possible. >>> >>>> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 2:40 PM Frank Chen wrote: >>> >>>> I agree. >>>> >>>> This is also a question that I want to ask why the version is still >> 0.xx >>>> which gives many people a hint that Druid is still under mature. >>>> >>>> There are many versioning schemas. One popular way is combining the >>> release >>>> year and month in the version. >>>> For example, if we're going to release a version in May this year, the >>> main >>>> version can be 22.5. >>>> >>>> >>>> Versioning is one thing, LTS strategy should also be clear. >>>> Since we're going to release several versions a year, we should plan in >>>> advance which one should be scheduled as a LTS version and maintain it >>> for >>>> a period of time if there are some vital bugs and security issues. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 1:21 PM Suneet Saldanha >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> I've been thinking that we should consider re-branding this release >> as >>>>> the Druid 23.0 instead of 0.23 release. I think this is appropriate >>>> because >>>>> typically a `0.XX` software version implies that the software is in >>> it's >>>>> infancy. >>>>> >>>>> Druid is quite mature, and we've been putting good guardrails in >> place >>> to >>>>> detect and prevent breaking API changes in each release. Druid has >> also >>>>> been running in production clusters for many different use cases for >>>> quite >>>>> some >>>>> time now. I think version 23.0 is more in line with the maturity of >> the >>>>> project. >>>>> >>>>> Is there a reason not to change the version for the next release? Any >>>>> other thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> On 2022/04/11 10:21:11 Abhishek Agarwal wrote: >>>>>> Thank you for creating that PR, Frank. In the last release, we >>> excluded >>>>>> helm charts since we were not sure about IP clearance. From >>>>>> https://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/, we should decide on IP >>>>>> clearance whether we include helm charts in artifacts or not. Any >>>>> thoughts? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 4:44 PM Frank Chen >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Abhishek, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you for starting the release work. >>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Druid 0.23 release
I'm supportive of changing the versioning to something without the leading zero in the next release where this is practical. If it's the one after 0.23.0, then I would go with 24.0. IMO, going with 1.0 would send a message that this is the first mature release. But that isn't the case: we have been doing mature releases for a long time now. Going with 24.0 is clearer in that regard. Happy to repeat this opinion on a new thread too :) On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 6:49 PM Frank Chen wrote: > For 0.23, I don't think we need to make changes because I think it may take > us some time to reach an agreement on the naming. > > We can start a new thread to discuss the versioning schema. > > > On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 8:19 PM Abhishek Agarwal < > abhishek.agar...@imply.io> > wrote: > > > We should definitely move away from the `0.xx` versioning scheme we have > > been using. However, the next version that we pick up is debatable. > `23.x` > > seems an odd jump from `0.23`. Can we increment the version to `1.x` > maybe? > > I also like the idea of using Yeah and Month that Frank has suggested. > > > > I don't think that 0.23 is the right release to make this change though. > > 0.23 has already been delayed because of CVE investigations and bug > fixes. > > I would like to get this release out of the door as soon as possible. > > > > On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 2:40 PM Frank Chen wrote: > > > > > I agree. > > > > > > This is also a question that I want to ask why the version is still > 0.xx > > > which gives many people a hint that Druid is still under mature. > > > > > > There are many versioning schemas. One popular way is combining the > > release > > > year and month in the version. > > > For example, if we're going to release a version in May this year, the > > main > > > version can be 22.5. > > > > > > > > > Versioning is one thing, LTS strategy should also be clear. > > > Since we're going to release several versions a year, we should plan in > > > advance which one should be scheduled as a LTS version and maintain it > > for > > > a period of time if there are some vital bugs and security issues. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 1:21 PM Suneet Saldanha > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I've been thinking that we should consider re-branding this release > as > > > > the Druid 23.0 instead of 0.23 release. I think this is appropriate > > > because > > > > typically a `0.XX` software version implies that the software is in > > it's > > > > infancy. > > > > > > > > Druid is quite mature, and we've been putting good guardrails in > place > > to > > > > detect and prevent breaking API changes in each release. Druid has > also > > > > been running in production clusters for many different use cases for > > > quite > > > > some > > > > time now. I think version 23.0 is more in line with the maturity of > the > > > > project. > > > > > > > > Is there a reason not to change the version for the next release? Any > > > > other thoughts? > > > > > > > > On 2022/04/11 10:21:11 Abhishek Agarwal wrote: > > > > > Thank you for creating that PR, Frank. In the last release, we > > excluded > > > > > helm charts since we were not sure about IP clearance. From > > > > > https://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/, we should decide on IP > > > > > clearance whether we include helm charts in artifacts or not. Any > > > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 4:44 PM Frank Chen > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Abhishek, > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for starting the release work. > > > > > > > > > > > > This PR should be merged to address a problem caused by a > previous > > > PR: > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/12067 > > > > > > I've added it to the 0.23 milestone. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 2:15 PM Abhishek Agarwal < > > > > > > abhishek.agar...@imply.io> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > > It's time to kick-off the process for druid 0.23 release. I > will > > > need > > > > > > help > > > > > > > from the community in surfacing any important issues that need > to > > > be > > > > > > > addressed before 0.23 release. We can use this thread to > discuss > > > > those > > > > > > > issues and take a call on how to unblock the release. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have also created 0.23 milestone ( > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/milestone/45). Any issues that > > we > > > > must > > > > > > > want > > > > > > > to fix in the 0.23 release, can be tagged with this milestone. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Druid 0.23 release
For 0.23, I don't think we need to make changes because I think it may take us some time to reach an agreement on the naming. We can start a new thread to discuss the versioning schema. On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 8:19 PM Abhishek Agarwal wrote: > We should definitely move away from the `0.xx` versioning scheme we have > been using. However, the next version that we pick up is debatable. `23.x` > seems an odd jump from `0.23`. Can we increment the version to `1.x` maybe? > I also like the idea of using Yeah and Month that Frank has suggested. > > I don't think that 0.23 is the right release to make this change though. > 0.23 has already been delayed because of CVE investigations and bug fixes. > I would like to get this release out of the door as soon as possible. > > On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 2:40 PM Frank Chen wrote: > > > I agree. > > > > This is also a question that I want to ask why the version is still 0.xx > > which gives many people a hint that Druid is still under mature. > > > > There are many versioning schemas. One popular way is combining the > release > > year and month in the version. > > For example, if we're going to release a version in May this year, the > main > > version can be 22.5. > > > > > > Versioning is one thing, LTS strategy should also be clear. > > Since we're going to release several versions a year, we should plan in > > advance which one should be scheduled as a LTS version and maintain it > for > > a period of time if there are some vital bugs and security issues. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 1:21 PM Suneet Saldanha > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I've been thinking that we should consider re-branding this release as > > > the Druid 23.0 instead of 0.23 release. I think this is appropriate > > because > > > typically a `0.XX` software version implies that the software is in > it's > > > infancy. > > > > > > Druid is quite mature, and we've been putting good guardrails in place > to > > > detect and prevent breaking API changes in each release. Druid has also > > > been running in production clusters for many different use cases for > > quite > > > some > > > time now. I think version 23.0 is more in line with the maturity of the > > > project. > > > > > > Is there a reason not to change the version for the next release? Any > > > other thoughts? > > > > > > On 2022/04/11 10:21:11 Abhishek Agarwal wrote: > > > > Thank you for creating that PR, Frank. In the last release, we > excluded > > > > helm charts since we were not sure about IP clearance. From > > > > https://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/, we should decide on IP > > > > clearance whether we include helm charts in artifacts or not. Any > > > thoughts? > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 4:44 PM Frank Chen > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Abhishek, > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for starting the release work. > > > > > > > > > > This PR should be merged to address a problem caused by a previous > > PR: > > > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/12067 > > > > > I've added it to the 0.23 milestone. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 2:15 PM Abhishek Agarwal < > > > > > abhishek.agar...@imply.io> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > > It's time to kick-off the process for druid 0.23 release. I will > > need > > > > > help > > > > > > from the community in surfacing any important issues that need to > > be > > > > > > addressed before 0.23 release. We can use this thread to discuss > > > those > > > > > > issues and take a call on how to unblock the release. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have also created 0.23 milestone ( > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/milestone/45). Any issues that > we > > > must > > > > > > want > > > > > > to fix in the 0.23 release, can be tagged with this milestone. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > > > > > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Druid 0.23 release
We should definitely move away from the `0.xx` versioning scheme we have been using. However, the next version that we pick up is debatable. `23.x` seems an odd jump from `0.23`. Can we increment the version to `1.x` maybe? I also like the idea of using Yeah and Month that Frank has suggested. I don't think that 0.23 is the right release to make this change though. 0.23 has already been delayed because of CVE investigations and bug fixes. I would like to get this release out of the door as soon as possible. On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 2:40 PM Frank Chen wrote: > I agree. > > This is also a question that I want to ask why the version is still 0.xx > which gives many people a hint that Druid is still under mature. > > There are many versioning schemas. One popular way is combining the release > year and month in the version. > For example, if we're going to release a version in May this year, the main > version can be 22.5. > > > Versioning is one thing, LTS strategy should also be clear. > Since we're going to release several versions a year, we should plan in > advance which one should be scheduled as a LTS version and maintain it for > a period of time if there are some vital bugs and security issues. > > > > > On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 1:21 PM Suneet Saldanha wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I've been thinking that we should consider re-branding this release as > > the Druid 23.0 instead of 0.23 release. I think this is appropriate > because > > typically a `0.XX` software version implies that the software is in it's > > infancy. > > > > Druid is quite mature, and we've been putting good guardrails in place to > > detect and prevent breaking API changes in each release. Druid has also > > been running in production clusters for many different use cases for > quite > > some > > time now. I think version 23.0 is more in line with the maturity of the > > project. > > > > Is there a reason not to change the version for the next release? Any > > other thoughts? > > > > On 2022/04/11 10:21:11 Abhishek Agarwal wrote: > > > Thank you for creating that PR, Frank. In the last release, we excluded > > > helm charts since we were not sure about IP clearance. From > > > https://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/, we should decide on IP > > > clearance whether we include helm charts in artifacts or not. Any > > thoughts? > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 4:44 PM Frank Chen > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Abhishek, > > > > > > > > Thank you for starting the release work. > > > > > > > > This PR should be merged to address a problem caused by a previous > PR: > > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/12067 > > > > I've added it to the 0.23 milestone. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 2:15 PM Abhishek Agarwal < > > > > abhishek.agar...@imply.io> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > > It's time to kick-off the process for druid 0.23 release. I will > need > > > > help > > > > > from the community in surfacing any important issues that need to > be > > > > > addressed before 0.23 release. We can use this thread to discuss > > those > > > > > issues and take a call on how to unblock the release. > > > > > > > > > > I have also created 0.23 milestone ( > > > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/milestone/45). Any issues that we > > must > > > > > want > > > > > to fix in the 0.23 release, can be tagged with this milestone. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Druid 0.23 release
I agree. This is also a question that I want to ask why the version is still 0.xx which gives many people a hint that Druid is still under mature. There are many versioning schemas. One popular way is combining the release year and month in the version. For example, if we're going to release a version in May this year, the main version can be 22.5. Versioning is one thing, LTS strategy should also be clear. Since we're going to release several versions a year, we should plan in advance which one should be scheduled as a LTS version and maintain it for a period of time if there are some vital bugs and security issues. On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 1:21 PM Suneet Saldanha wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been thinking that we should consider re-branding this release as > the Druid 23.0 instead of 0.23 release. I think this is appropriate because > typically a `0.XX` software version implies that the software is in it's > infancy. > > Druid is quite mature, and we've been putting good guardrails in place to > detect and prevent breaking API changes in each release. Druid has also > been running in production clusters for many different use cases for quite > some > time now. I think version 23.0 is more in line with the maturity of the > project. > > Is there a reason not to change the version for the next release? Any > other thoughts? > > On 2022/04/11 10:21:11 Abhishek Agarwal wrote: > > Thank you for creating that PR, Frank. In the last release, we excluded > > helm charts since we were not sure about IP clearance. From > > https://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/, we should decide on IP > > clearance whether we include helm charts in artifacts or not. Any > thoughts? > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 4:44 PM Frank Chen wrote: > > > > > Hi Abhishek, > > > > > > Thank you for starting the release work. > > > > > > This PR should be merged to address a problem caused by a previous PR: > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/12067 > > > I've added it to the 0.23 milestone. > > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 2:15 PM Abhishek Agarwal < > > > abhishek.agar...@imply.io> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > It's time to kick-off the process for druid 0.23 release. I will need > > > help > > > > from the community in surfacing any important issues that need to be > > > > addressed before 0.23 release. We can use this thread to discuss > those > > > > issues and take a call on how to unblock the release. > > > > > > > > I have also created 0.23 milestone ( > > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/milestone/45). Any issues that we > must > > > > want > > > > to fix in the 0.23 release, can be tagged with this milestone. > > > > > > > > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Druid 0.23 release
Hi all, I've been thinking that we should consider re-branding this release as the Druid 23.0 instead of 0.23 release. I think this is appropriate because typically a `0.XX` software version implies that the software is in it's infancy. Druid is quite mature, and we've been putting good guardrails in place to detect and prevent breaking API changes in each release. Druid has also been running in production clusters for many different use cases for quite some time now. I think version 23.0 is more in line with the maturity of the project. Is there a reason not to change the version for the next release? Any other thoughts? On 2022/04/11 10:21:11 Abhishek Agarwal wrote: > Thank you for creating that PR, Frank. In the last release, we excluded > helm charts since we were not sure about IP clearance. From > https://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/, we should decide on IP > clearance whether we include helm charts in artifacts or not. Any thoughts? > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 4:44 PM Frank Chen wrote: > > > Hi Abhishek, > > > > Thank you for starting the release work. > > > > This PR should be merged to address a problem caused by a previous PR: > > https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/12067 > > I've added it to the 0.23 milestone. > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 2:15 PM Abhishek Agarwal < > > abhishek.agar...@imply.io> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > It's time to kick-off the process for druid 0.23 release. I will need > > help > > > from the community in surfacing any important issues that need to be > > > addressed before 0.23 release. We can use this thread to discuss those > > > issues and take a call on how to unblock the release. > > > > > > I have also created 0.23 milestone ( > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/milestone/45). Any issues that we must > > > want > > > to fix in the 0.23 release, can be tagged with this milestone. > > > > > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Druid 0.23 release
Thank you for creating that PR, Frank. In the last release, we excluded helm charts since we were not sure about IP clearance. From https://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/, we should decide on IP clearance whether we include helm charts in artifacts or not. Any thoughts? On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 4:44 PM Frank Chen wrote: > Hi Abhishek, > > Thank you for starting the release work. > > This PR should be merged to address a problem caused by a previous PR: > https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/12067 > I've added it to the 0.23 milestone. > > > Thank you. > > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 2:15 PM Abhishek Agarwal < > abhishek.agar...@imply.io> > wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > It's time to kick-off the process for druid 0.23 release. I will need > help > > from the community in surfacing any important issues that need to be > > addressed before 0.23 release. We can use this thread to discuss those > > issues and take a call on how to unblock the release. > > > > I have also created 0.23 milestone ( > > https://github.com/apache/druid/milestone/45). Any issues that we must > > want > > to fix in the 0.23 release, can be tagged with this milestone. > > >
Re: Re: 0.23
Hi Baris I don't see an attachment in your email. On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 5:38 AM Baris Dogan wrote: > Hi, > > Could you just put the following CVE findings (attached into the email) > into the next release scope which come out of trivy 0.23 tests. > > On 2022/03/25 03:52:50 Gian Merlino wrote: > > I agree it's a good time to do a release. Most of the release-manager > steps > > involve having commit privileges, but nevertheless, you might find it > > interesting to read about the process: > > > https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/distribution/asf-release-process-guide.md > > > > You've actually already done the first step: start a thread on the dev > > list. The next part is we have a discussion & see if there's anything > > critical we should get into this release before we branch it off. > > > > Anyone have any comments on that? > > > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 9:54 PM Eyal Yurman > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Anyone plan to work on releasing 0.23? > > > I'll be really glad to manage the 0.23 release but I'm not a > committer. > > > Assuming this requires committer privileges, I'd be glad if anyone can > > > volunteer. > > > > > > BTW, have you noticed that we shifted away from the official quarterly > > > releases? Perhaps we should discuss our release process. Especially > since > > > we also don't release minor versions (except for hotfixes immediately > after > > > a major release). > > > > > > -- > Zeki Baris Dogan > MSc. Software Engineer. > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org
RE: Re: 0.23
Hi, Could you just put the following CVE findings (attached into the email) into the next release scope which come out of trivy 0.23 tests. On 2022/03/25 03:52:50 Gian Merlino wrote: > I agree it's a good time to do a release. Most of the release-manager steps > involve having commit privileges, but nevertheless, you might find it > interesting to read about the process: > https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/distribution/asf-release-process-guide.md > > You've actually already done the first step: start a thread on the dev > list. The next part is we have a discussion & see if there's anything > critical we should get into this release before we branch it off. > > Anyone have any comments on that? > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 9:54 PM Eyal Yurman > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Anyone plan to work on releasing 0.23? > > I'll be really glad to manage the 0.23 release but I'm not a committer. > > Assuming this requires committer privileges, I'd be glad if anyone can > > volunteer. > > > > BTW, have you noticed that we shifted away from the official quarterly > > releases? Perhaps we should discuss our release process. Especially since > > we also don't release minor versions (except for hotfixes immediately after > > a major release). > > > -- Zeki Baris Dogan MSc. Software Engineer. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@druid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@druid.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Druid 0.23 release
Hi Abhishek, Thank you for starting the release work. This PR should be merged to address a problem caused by a previous PR: https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/12067 I've added it to the 0.23 milestone. Thank you. On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 2:15 PM Abhishek Agarwal wrote: > Hello everyone, > It's time to kick-off the process for druid 0.23 release. I will need help > from the community in surfacing any important issues that need to be > addressed before 0.23 release. We can use this thread to discuss those > issues and take a call on how to unblock the release. > > I have also created 0.23 milestone ( > https://github.com/apache/druid/milestone/45). Any issues that we must > want > to fix in the 0.23 release, can be tagged with this milestone. >
[DISCUSS] Druid 0.23 release
Hello everyone, It's time to kick-off the process for druid 0.23 release. I will need help from the community in surfacing any important issues that need to be addressed before 0.23 release. We can use this thread to discuss those issues and take a call on how to unblock the release. I have also created 0.23 milestone ( https://github.com/apache/druid/milestone/45). Any issues that we must want to fix in the 0.23 release, can be tagged with this milestone.
Re: [E] Re: 0.23
Thank you! Much appreciated. On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 7:58 AM Abhishek Agarwal wrote: > Hi Eyal > Thanks for bringing this up. I am going to volunteer for shepherding 0.23 > release. I will start a new thread soon. > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 9:23 AM Gian Merlino wrote: > >> I agree it's a good time to do a release. Most of the release-manager >> steps >> involve having commit privileges, but nevertheless, you might find it >> interesting to read about the process: >> >> https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/distribution/asf-release-process-guide.md >> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/distribution/asf-release-process-guide.md__;!!Op6eflyXZCqGR5I!Ua4IHq98uxkm8ND-RNYibHHdDTAej5ujw42RkLv6V-H5gUjkZnXGqXdllhGdqL4$> >> >> You've actually already done the first step: start a thread on the dev >> list. The next part is we have a discussion & see if there's anything >> critical we should get into this release before we branch it off. >> >> Anyone have any comments on that? >> >> On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 9:54 PM Eyal Yurman > .invalid> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > Anyone plan to work on releasing 0.23? >> > I'll be really glad to manage the 0.23 release but I'm not a committer. >> > Assuming this requires committer privileges, I'd be glad if anyone can >> > volunteer. >> > >> > BTW, have you noticed that we shifted away from the official quarterly >> > releases? Perhaps we should discuss our release process. Especially >> since >> > we also don't release minor versions (except for hotfixes immediately >> after >> > a major release). >> > >> >
Re: 0.23
Hi Eyal Thanks for bringing this up. I am going to volunteer for shepherding 0.23 release. I will start a new thread soon. On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 9:23 AM Gian Merlino wrote: > I agree it's a good time to do a release. Most of the release-manager steps > involve having commit privileges, but nevertheless, you might find it > interesting to read about the process: > > https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/distribution/asf-release-process-guide.md > > You've actually already done the first step: start a thread on the dev > list. The next part is we have a discussion & see if there's anything > critical we should get into this release before we branch it off. > > Anyone have any comments on that? > > On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 9:54 PM Eyal Yurman .invalid> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Anyone plan to work on releasing 0.23? > > I'll be really glad to manage the 0.23 release but I'm not a committer. > > Assuming this requires committer privileges, I'd be glad if anyone can > > volunteer. > > > > BTW, have you noticed that we shifted away from the official quarterly > > releases? Perhaps we should discuss our release process. Especially since > > we also don't release minor versions (except for hotfixes immediately > after > > a major release). > > >
Re: 0.23
I agree it's a good time to do a release. Most of the release-manager steps involve having commit privileges, but nevertheless, you might find it interesting to read about the process: https://github.com/apache/druid/blob/master/distribution/asf-release-process-guide.md You've actually already done the first step: start a thread on the dev list. The next part is we have a discussion & see if there's anything critical we should get into this release before we branch it off. Anyone have any comments on that? On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 9:54 PM Eyal Yurman wrote: > Hi, > > Anyone plan to work on releasing 0.23? > I'll be really glad to manage the 0.23 release but I'm not a committer. > Assuming this requires committer privileges, I'd be glad if anyone can > volunteer. > > BTW, have you noticed that we shifted away from the official quarterly > releases? Perhaps we should discuss our release process. Especially since > we also don't release minor versions (except for hotfixes immediately after > a major release). >
0.23
Hi, Anyone plan to work on releasing 0.23? I'll be really glad to manage the 0.23 release but I'm not a committer. Assuming this requires committer privileges, I'd be glad if anyone can volunteer. BTW, have you noticed that we shifted away from the official quarterly releases? Perhaps we should discuss our release process. Especially since we also don't release minor versions (except for hotfixes immediately after a major release).
