Re: Moving python, php and node.js in separate repos and release cycles
Ok, thanks for the clarification. I retract my "-1": no strong objections. On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 3:15 PM Dmitriy Pavlov wrote: > Hi Folks, > > There is nothing wrong with releasing system by it's modules, one-by-one. > Also it is perfectly OK to have each module in a separate git repo. Each of > these module release-candidate is voted separately. At the foundation > level, release cycle of the project/modules is not defined, it is up to the > community to decide. It is just general common sense: often releases are > preferred. > > The only one rule, community should vote on release with 3 +1 votes from > the PMC members. And there can be the only issue if module release would > stall without required number of binding votes. > > Sincerely, > Dmitriy Pavlov > > ср, 22 апр. 2020 г. в 15:03, Igor Sapego : > > > Pavel, > > > > 1. We can conduct separate votes for every client, do you see any issues > > here? > > 2. This is true, but we have backward compatibility in our protocol, so > > everything > > should work just fine. > > > > Best Regards, > > Igor > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 9:22 PM Pavel Tupitsyn > > wrote: > > > > > -1 > > > > > > - Ignite is a single Apache project, it follows Apache release > > guidelines, > > > with voting and so on. Not sure how are we going to follow that with a > > > separate repo. > > > - Thin client features are often tied to server-side changes > > > > > > > What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? > > > Those reuse some code with thick counterparts - same way as Java thin > > does. > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 4:22 PM Nikolay Izhikov > > > wrote: > > > > > > > What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? > > > > > > > > > 21 апр. 2020 г., в 16:19, Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > написал(а): > > > > > > > > > > +1 since > > > > > - Simpler release may allow us to release more often > > > > > - Often releases - users will get updates faster, more chances to > > grow > > > > and > > > > > keep our user base > > > > > - Faster updates and easy to get next update may have positive > effect > > > on > > > > > community growth. Since newcomer may want to fix a bug and later > use > > > > result > > > > > in his/her production environment. > > > > > > > > > > вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 13:27, Alexey Zinoviev < > zaleslaw@gmail.com > > >: > > > > > > > > > >> Agree with these non-JVM languages. > > > > >> Especially for Python:) > > > > >> > > > > >> вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 12:58, Igor Sapego : > > > > >> > > > > >>> Guys, > > > > >>> > > > > >>> It was discussed on the dev list a few times that it would be a > > good > > > > >>> idea to move Python, Node.js and PHP thin clients to separate > repos > > > > >>> and separate release cycles. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> In short there are several arguments for that: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> 1. There are no dependencies on the core functionality so there > is > > > > simply > > > > >>> no need for them to be in the main repo. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> 2. Those thin clients often do not get updates from release to > > > release, > > > > >> but > > > > >>> still > > > > >>> we "release" them, as they are a part of the main release. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> 3. Moving them to a separate release cycle will allow us to > release > > > > some > > > > >>> hot > > > > >>> fixes for those clients faster and easier. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> 4. Composer needs a PHP packet that is released to be in a > separate > > > > >>> repository. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Thoughts? > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Best Regards, > > > > >>> Igor > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Moving python, php and node.js in separate repos and release cycles
Hi Folks, There is nothing wrong with releasing system by it's modules, one-by-one. Also it is perfectly OK to have each module in a separate git repo. Each of these module release-candidate is voted separately. At the foundation level, release cycle of the project/modules is not defined, it is up to the community to decide. It is just general common sense: often releases are preferred. The only one rule, community should vote on release with 3 +1 votes from the PMC members. And there can be the only issue if module release would stall without required number of binding votes. Sincerely, Dmitriy Pavlov ср, 22 апр. 2020 г. в 15:03, Igor Sapego : > Pavel, > > 1. We can conduct separate votes for every client, do you see any issues > here? > 2. This is true, but we have backward compatibility in our protocol, so > everything > should work just fine. > > Best Regards, > Igor > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 9:22 PM Pavel Tupitsyn > wrote: > > > -1 > > > > - Ignite is a single Apache project, it follows Apache release > guidelines, > > with voting and so on. Not sure how are we going to follow that with a > > separate repo. > > - Thin client features are often tied to server-side changes > > > > > What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? > > Those reuse some code with thick counterparts - same way as Java thin > does. > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 4:22 PM Nikolay Izhikov > > wrote: > > > > > What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? > > > > > > > 21 апр. 2020 г., в 16:19, Dmitriy Pavlov > > > написал(а): > > > > > > > > +1 since > > > > - Simpler release may allow us to release more often > > > > - Often releases - users will get updates faster, more chances to > grow > > > and > > > > keep our user base > > > > - Faster updates and easy to get next update may have positive effect > > on > > > > community growth. Since newcomer may want to fix a bug and later use > > > result > > > > in his/her production environment. > > > > > > > > вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 13:27, Alexey Zinoviev >: > > > > > > > >> Agree with these non-JVM languages. > > > >> Especially for Python:) > > > >> > > > >> вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 12:58, Igor Sapego : > > > >> > > > >>> Guys, > > > >>> > > > >>> It was discussed on the dev list a few times that it would be a > good > > > >>> idea to move Python, Node.js and PHP thin clients to separate repos > > > >>> and separate release cycles. > > > >>> > > > >>> In short there are several arguments for that: > > > >>> > > > >>> 1. There are no dependencies on the core functionality so there is > > > simply > > > >>> no need for them to be in the main repo. > > > >>> > > > >>> 2. Those thin clients often do not get updates from release to > > release, > > > >> but > > > >>> still > > > >>> we "release" them, as they are a part of the main release. > > > >>> > > > >>> 3. Moving them to a separate release cycle will allow us to release > > > some > > > >>> hot > > > >>> fixes for those clients faster and easier. > > > >>> > > > >>> 4. Composer needs a PHP packet that is released to be in a separate > > > >>> repository. > > > >>> > > > >>> Thoughts? > > > >>> > > > >>> Best Regards, > > > >>> Igor > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
Re: Moving python, php and node.js in separate repos and release cycles
Pavel, 1. We can conduct separate votes for every client, do you see any issues here? 2. This is true, but we have backward compatibility in our protocol, so everything should work just fine. Best Regards, Igor On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 9:22 PM Pavel Tupitsyn wrote: > -1 > > - Ignite is a single Apache project, it follows Apache release guidelines, > with voting and so on. Not sure how are we going to follow that with a > separate repo. > - Thin client features are often tied to server-side changes > > > What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? > Those reuse some code with thick counterparts - same way as Java thin does. > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 4:22 PM Nikolay Izhikov > wrote: > > > What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? > > > > > 21 апр. 2020 г., в 16:19, Dmitriy Pavlov > > написал(а): > > > > > > +1 since > > > - Simpler release may allow us to release more often > > > - Often releases - users will get updates faster, more chances to grow > > and > > > keep our user base > > > - Faster updates and easy to get next update may have positive effect > on > > > community growth. Since newcomer may want to fix a bug and later use > > result > > > in his/her production environment. > > > > > > вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 13:27, Alexey Zinoviev : > > > > > >> Agree with these non-JVM languages. > > >> Especially for Python:) > > >> > > >> вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 12:58, Igor Sapego : > > >> > > >>> Guys, > > >>> > > >>> It was discussed on the dev list a few times that it would be a good > > >>> idea to move Python, Node.js and PHP thin clients to separate repos > > >>> and separate release cycles. > > >>> > > >>> In short there are several arguments for that: > > >>> > > >>> 1. There are no dependencies on the core functionality so there is > > simply > > >>> no need for them to be in the main repo. > > >>> > > >>> 2. Those thin clients often do not get updates from release to > release, > > >> but > > >>> still > > >>> we "release" them, as they are a part of the main release. > > >>> > > >>> 3. Moving them to a separate release cycle will allow us to release > > some > > >>> hot > > >>> fixes for those clients faster and easier. > > >>> > > >>> 4. Composer needs a PHP packet that is released to be in a separate > > >>> repository. > > >>> > > >>> Thoughts? > > >>> > > >>> Best Regards, > > >>> Igor > > >>> > > >> > > > > >
Re: Moving python, php and node.js in separate repos and release cycles
-1 - Ignite is a single Apache project, it follows Apache release guidelines, with voting and so on. Not sure how are we going to follow that with a separate repo. - Thin client features are often tied to server-side changes > What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? Those reuse some code with thick counterparts - same way as Java thin does. On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 4:22 PM Nikolay Izhikov wrote: > What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? > > > 21 апр. 2020 г., в 16:19, Dmitriy Pavlov > написал(а): > > > > +1 since > > - Simpler release may allow us to release more often > > - Often releases - users will get updates faster, more chances to grow > and > > keep our user base > > - Faster updates and easy to get next update may have positive effect on > > community growth. Since newcomer may want to fix a bug and later use > result > > in his/her production environment. > > > > вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 13:27, Alexey Zinoviev : > > > >> Agree with these non-JVM languages. > >> Especially for Python:) > >> > >> вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 12:58, Igor Sapego : > >> > >>> Guys, > >>> > >>> It was discussed on the dev list a few times that it would be a good > >>> idea to move Python, Node.js and PHP thin clients to separate repos > >>> and separate release cycles. > >>> > >>> In short there are several arguments for that: > >>> > >>> 1. There are no dependencies on the core functionality so there is > simply > >>> no need for them to be in the main repo. > >>> > >>> 2. Those thin clients often do not get updates from release to release, > >> but > >>> still > >>> we "release" them, as they are a part of the main release. > >>> > >>> 3. Moving them to a separate release cycle will allow us to release > some > >>> hot > >>> fixes for those clients faster and easier. > >>> > >>> 4. Composer needs a PHP packet that is released to be in a separate > >>> repository. > >>> > >>> Thoughts? > >>> > >>> Best Regards, > >>> Igor > >>> > >> > >
Re: Moving python, php and node.js in separate repos and release cycles
What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? > 21 апр. 2020 г., в 16:19, Dmitriy Pavlov написал(а): > > +1 since > - Simpler release may allow us to release more often > - Often releases - users will get updates faster, more chances to grow and > keep our user base > - Faster updates and easy to get next update may have positive effect on > community growth. Since newcomer may want to fix a bug and later use result > in his/her production environment. > > вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 13:27, Alexey Zinoviev : > >> Agree with these non-JVM languages. >> Especially for Python:) >> >> вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 12:58, Igor Sapego : >> >>> Guys, >>> >>> It was discussed on the dev list a few times that it would be a good >>> idea to move Python, Node.js and PHP thin clients to separate repos >>> and separate release cycles. >>> >>> In short there are several arguments for that: >>> >>> 1. There are no dependencies on the core functionality so there is simply >>> no need for them to be in the main repo. >>> >>> 2. Those thin clients often do not get updates from release to release, >> but >>> still >>> we "release" them, as they are a part of the main release. >>> >>> 3. Moving them to a separate release cycle will allow us to release some >>> hot >>> fixes for those clients faster and easier. >>> >>> 4. Composer needs a PHP packet that is released to be in a separate >>> repository. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Igor >>> >>
Re: Moving python, php and node.js in separate repos and release cycles
+1 since - Simpler release may allow us to release more often - Often releases - users will get updates faster, more chances to grow and keep our user base - Faster updates and easy to get next update may have positive effect on community growth. Since newcomer may want to fix a bug and later use result in his/her production environment. вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 13:27, Alexey Zinoviev : > Agree with these non-JVM languages. > Especially for Python:) > > вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 12:58, Igor Sapego : > > > Guys, > > > > It was discussed on the dev list a few times that it would be a good > > idea to move Python, Node.js and PHP thin clients to separate repos > > and separate release cycles. > > > > In short there are several arguments for that: > > > > 1. There are no dependencies on the core functionality so there is simply > > no need for them to be in the main repo. > > > > 2. Those thin clients often do not get updates from release to release, > but > > still > > we "release" them, as they are a part of the main release. > > > > 3. Moving them to a separate release cycle will allow us to release some > > hot > > fixes for those clients faster and easier. > > > > 4. Composer needs a PHP packet that is released to be in a separate > > repository. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Best Regards, > > Igor > > >
Re: Moving python, php and node.js in separate repos and release cycles
Agree with these non-JVM languages. Especially for Python:) вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 12:58, Igor Sapego : > Guys, > > It was discussed on the dev list a few times that it would be a good > idea to move Python, Node.js and PHP thin clients to separate repos > and separate release cycles. > > In short there are several arguments for that: > > 1. There are no dependencies on the core functionality so there is simply > no need for them to be in the main repo. > > 2. Those thin clients often do not get updates from release to release, but > still > we "release" them, as they are a part of the main release. > > 3. Moving them to a separate release cycle will allow us to release some > hot > fixes for those clients faster and easier. > > 4. Composer needs a PHP packet that is released to be in a separate > repository. > > Thoughts? > > Best Regards, > Igor >
Moving python, php and node.js in separate repos and release cycles
Guys, It was discussed on the dev list a few times that it would be a good idea to move Python, Node.js and PHP thin clients to separate repos and separate release cycles. In short there are several arguments for that: 1. There are no dependencies on the core functionality so there is simply no need for them to be in the main repo. 2. Those thin clients often do not get updates from release to release, but still we "release" them, as they are a part of the main release. 3. Moving them to a separate release cycle will allow us to release some hot fixes for those clients faster and easier. 4. Composer needs a PHP packet that is released to be in a separate repository. Thoughts? Best Regards, Igor
