Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

It seems that everyone is in favor of renaming 0.8.3 to 0.9.0. I made the following changes in the jira: (1) rename version 0.9.0 to 0.10.0.0; (2) rename version 0.8.3 to 0.9.0.0; (3) add version 0.9.0.1. Thanks, Jun On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Joe Stein wrote: >

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

+1 for 0.9 On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:20 AM, Stevo Slavić wrote: > +1 (non-binding) for 0.9 > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:41 AM, Jun Rao wrote: > > > +1 for 0.9. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jun > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Ismael Juma

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

are we going to deem the new consumer in 0.9.0 as beta? Do we want to-do a 0.9.0-beta and this way when the consumer is g2g we 0.9.0.0 0.9.0-beta also allows us to release a lot of new things a bit sooner and have some good cycles of fixes (because you know they will come) There is enough new

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

Jun, Makes sense, thanks! ~ Joestein On Sep 10, 2015 1:05 PM, "Jun Rao" wrote: > Hi, Joe, > > One of the reasons that we have been doing beta releases before is to > stabilize the public apis. However, in trunk, we have introduced the api > stability annotation. The new java

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

+1 (non-binding) for 0.9 On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:41 AM, Jun Rao wrote: > +1 for 0.9. > > Thanks, > > Jun > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Ismael Juma wrote: > > > +1 (non-binding) for 0.9. > > > > Ismael > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Gwen

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

I propose a simple rename: s/0.8.3/0.9.0/ No change of scope and not including current 0.9.0 issues. On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Rajini Sivaram < rajinisiva...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Is the plan to release 0.9 in October with the features currently targeted > for 0.8.3, or would 0.9 be a

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

+1 on 0.9.0 On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Ashish Singh wrote: > +1 on 0.9.0 > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Gwen Shapira wrote: > > > I propose a simple rename: s/0.8.3/0.9.0/ > > > > No change of scope and not including current 0.9.0 issues. > >

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

+1 on 0.9.0 On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Gwen Shapira wrote: > I propose a simple rename: s/0.8.3/0.9.0/ > > No change of scope and not including current 0.9.0 issues. > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Rajini Sivaram < > rajinisiva...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > Is

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

Based on the scope, prefer 0.9. On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Jay Kreps wrote: > +1 on 0.9 > > -Jay > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Gwen Shapira wrote: > > > Hi Kafka Fans, > > > > What do you think of making the next release (the one with

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

+1 on 0.9 - we may want to adjust our ApiVersions accordingly (i.e., 0.8.3 -> 0.9.0) On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Guozhang Wang wrote: > +1 on 0.9 as well. > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Aditya Auradkar < > aaurad...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > >> +1 on 0.9 >> >>

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

+1 (non-binding) for 0.9. Ismael On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Gwen Shapira wrote: > Hi Kafka Fans, > > What do you think of making the next release (the one with security, new > consumer, quotas, etc) a 0.9.0 instead of 0.8.3? > > It has lots of new features, and new

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

+1 on 0.9 as well. On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Aditya Auradkar < aaurad...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > +1 on 0.9 > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Edward Ribeiro > wrote: > > > +1 on 0.9.0 > > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Ashish Singh

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

+1 for 0.9 - we may want to get rid of deprecated configs if possible in this, instead of waiting for 1.0. Thanks, Mayuresh On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 2:07 PM, Joel Koshy wrote: > +1 on 0.9 - we may want to adjust our ApiVersions accordingly (i.e., > 0.8.3 -> 0.9.0) > > > On

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

Hi Gwen, I certainly think 0.9.0 is better than 0.8.3. As regards semantic versioning, do we have a plan for a 1.0 release? IIUC, compatibility rules don't really apply for pre-1.0 stuff. I'd argue that Kafka already qualifies for 1.x. Aditya On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Gwen Shapira

Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

Hi Kafka Fans, What do you think of making the next release (the one with security, new consumer, quotas, etc) a 0.9.0 instead of 0.8.3? It has lots of new features, and new consumer was pretty much scoped for 0.9.0, so it matches our original roadmap. I feel that so many awesome features

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

Hi Gwen, What's the expected meaning of the individual digits of the version for this community? Could you give me some insight here? -Flavio > On 08 Sep 2015, at 18:19, Gwen Shapira wrote: > > Hi Kafka Fans, > > What do you think of making the next release (the one with

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

We've been rather messy about this in the past, but I'm hoping to converge toward semantic versioning: http://semver.org/ 0.9.0 will fit since we are adding new functionality in backward compatible manner. On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Flavio Junqueira wrote: > Hi Gwen, > >

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

I don't know of any 1.0 plans. IMO, it makes sense to have 0.9.0 out first, and then discuss what it will take to get to 1.0. Does that make sense? On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Aditya Auradkar < aaurad...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > Hi Gwen, > > I certainly think 0.9.0 is better than

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

Based on the new feature in next release, 0.9 looks reasonable. There might be some other things worth thinking about. Although we have a lot of new feature added, many of them are actually either still in development or not well tested yet. For example, for security features, only SSL is done

Re: Maybe 0.8.3 should really be 0.9.0?

+1 for 0.9. Thanks, Jun On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Ismael Juma wrote: > +1 (non-binding) for 0.9. > > Ismael > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Gwen Shapira wrote: > > > Hi Kafka Fans, > > > > What do you think of making the next release (the one