Re: Release planning for 7.0

Ah, thanks for pointing it out, Erick! I forgot to push to the branch_7_0 apart from branch_7x. Done so now. On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Erick Erickson wrote: > Ishan: > > I'm a little confused. 7x? Or 7x _and_ 7.0? > > On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Ishan

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Ishan: I'm a little confused. 7x? Or 7x _and_ 7.0? On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 3:16 AM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya wrote: >> Hi Anshum, >> I'd like to have SOLR-10282 in for 7.0. It is a low impact new feature >> that helps admins to enable >> Kerberos more easily using the

Re: Release planning for 7.0

> Hi Anshum, > I'd like to have SOLR-10282 in for 7.0. It is a low impact new feature that helps admins to enable > Kerberos more easily using the bin/solr script. > I should be able to have it dev-complete by end of Friday. Let me know if you have any objections. > Thanks, > Ishan Hi Anshum,

Re: Release planning for 7.0

25, 2017 7:52 PM To: dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Release planning for 7.0 Hi Uwe, +1 on getting SOLR-10951 in before the release but I assume you weren't hinting at holding back the branch creation :). I am not well versed with that stuff so it would certainly be optimal for some

Re: Release planning for 7.0

va 9 >> with your Solr servers. >> >> >> >> Uwe >> >> >> >> - >> >> Uwe Schindler >> >> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen >> >> http://www.thetaphi.de >> >> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de >> >> >> &

Re: Release planning for 7.0

u...@thetaphi.de > > > > *From:* Anshum Gupta [mailto:ans...@anshumgupta.net] > *Sent:* Sunday, June 25, 2017 7:52 PM > > > *To:* dev@lucene.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: Release planning for 7.0 > > > > Hi Uwe, > > > > +1 on getting SOLR-10951 >

Re: Release planning for 7.0

- > > Uwe Schindler > > Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen > > http://www.thetaphi.de > > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > > > *From:* Anshum Gupta [mailto:ans...@anshumgupta.net] > *Sent:* Sunday, June 25, 2017 7:52 PM > > > *To:* dev@lucene.apache.org > *Subjec

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I'd be interested in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10962 making it into 7.0 if there's time but wouldn't want to block progress. Christine From: dev@lucene.apache.org At: 06/27/17 07:30:47 To: dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Release planning for 7.0 Erick, sure. If you think

RE: Release planning for 7.0

[mailto:ans...@anshumgupta.net] Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2017 7:52 PM To: dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Release planning for 7.0 Hi Uwe, +1 on getting <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10951> SOLR-10951 in before the release but I assume you weren't hinting at holding back th

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Erick, sure. If you think it'd take longer, could you mark that as a blocker so I hold back moving ahead with the release process? -Anshum On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 11:28 PM Anshum Gupta wrote: > Hi Alan, > > Sorry for the delay in replying but go ahead and commit this.

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Hi Alan, Sorry for the delay in replying but go ahead and commit this. I'm still trying to work through the 8.0 version bump test failures. If you don't make it by the time I push the branches, kindly commit to all the branches, else I'll make sure that your commit makes it to all of those.

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I will get https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10874 into 7.0 and branch 6x in the next few days - I’ll merge to whatever branches are needed at the time. Erik > On Jun 19, 2017, at 10:45 AM, Anshum Gupta wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Here's the update

Re: Release planning for 7.0

> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de <mailto:u...@thetaphi.de> > > > From: Anshum Gupta [mailto:ans...@anshumgupta.net > <mailto:ans...@anshumgupta.net>] > Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 10:52 PM > > > To: dev@lucene.apache.org <mailto:dev@lucene.apache.org> > Subject: Re:

Re: Release planning for 7.0

t; > http://www.thetaphi.de > > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > > > *From:* Anshum Gupta [mailto:ans...@anshumgupta.net] > *Sent:* Saturday, June 24, 2017 10:52 PM > > > *To:* dev@lucene.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: Release planning for 7.0 > > > &g

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Hi Trey, Thanks for the heads up, and I am completely with you in terms of releasing this with 7.0. I am fine with you getting this in post branch creation so I'll go ahead and create the branch later in the day today. -Anshum On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 8:10 AM Trey Grainger

RE: Release planning for 7.0

Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de <http://www.thetaphi.de/> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de From: Anshum Gupta [mailto:ans...@anshumgupta.net] Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2017 10:52 PM To: dev@lucene.apache.org Subject: Re: Release planning for 7.0 I'll create the 7x, and 7.0 branches tomorrow.

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Anshum, I'll be working on what I hope is a final patch for SOLR-10494 (Change default response format from xml to json) today. I expect to have it uploaded in the late evening US time. It will still need to be reviewed and (if acceptable) committed. It feels to me like the kind of change that

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I'll create the 7x, and 7.0 branches *tomorrow*. Ishan, do you mean you would be able to close it by Tuesday? You would have to commit to both 7.0, and 7.x, in addition to master, but I think that should be ok. We also have SOLR-10803 open at this moment and we'd need to come to a decision on

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Hi Anshum, > I will send out an email a day before cutting the branch, as well as once the branch is in place. I'm right now on travel, and unable to finish SOLR-10574 until Monday (possibly Tuesday). Regards, Ishan On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 5:08 PM, Anshum Gupta wrote: >

Re: Release planning for 7.0

>From my understanding, there's not really a 'plan' but some intention to release a 6.7 at some time if enough people need it, right? In that case I wouldn't hold back anything for a 6x line release and cut the 7x, and 7.0 branches around, but not before the coming weekend. I will send out an

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Anshum: I'm one of the people that expect a 6.7 release, but it's more along the lines of setting expectations than having features I really want to get in to the 6x code line. We nearly always have "just a few things" that someone would like to put in, and/or a bug fix or two that surfaces. I

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I’d like to get https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7877 in for 7.0 - should be able to commit in the next couple of days. Alan Woodward www.flax.co.uk > On 19 Jun 2017, at 15:45, Anshum Gupta wrote: > > Hi

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Hi everyone, Here's the update about 7.0 release: There are still unresolved blockers for 7.0. Solr (12):

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I've committed the most critical changes I wanted to make. Please don't hold up on a v7 release on my part. Thanks! Dennis On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Dennis Gove wrote: > Hi, > > I also have some cleanup I'd like to do prior to a cut of 7. There are > some new stream

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Hi, I also have some cleanup I'd like to do prior to a cut of 7. There are some new stream evaluators that I'm finding don't flow with the general flavor of evaluators. I'm using https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10882 for the cleanup, but I do intend to be complete by June 16th.

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Hi Anshum, I would like to request you to consider delaying the branch cutting by a bit till we finalize the SOLR-10574 discussions and make the changes. Alternatively, we could backport the changes to that branch after you cut the branch now. Regards, Ishan On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 1:02 AM, Steve

Re: Release planning for 7.0

> On Jun 2, 2017, at 5:40 PM, Shawn Heisey wrote: > > On 6/2/2017 10:23 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > >> I see zero benefits from cutting branch_7x now. Shawn, can you describe why >> you think we should do this? >> >> My interpretation of your argument is that you’re in

Re: Release planning for 7.0

On 6/2/2017 10:23 AM, Steve Rowe wrote: > I see zero benefits from cutting branch_7x now. Shawn, can you describe why > you think we should do this? > > My interpretation of your argument is that you’re in favor of delaying > cutting branch_7_0 until feature freeze - which BTW is the status

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I see zero benefits from cutting branch_7x now. Shawn, can you describe why you think we should do this? My interpretation of your argument is that you’re in favor of delaying cutting branch_7_0 until feature freeze - which BTW is the status quo - but I don’t get why that argues for cutting

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I was trying to find this stuff in the ReleaseToDo documentation as I don't exactly remember what I did for 5.0, or what happened during 6.0 but there doesn't seem to be any. What you suggest makes things easier for sure but it ideally would also mean that we don't add new features to 7x. If we

Re: Release planning for 7.0

On 6/2/2017 6:45 AM, Adrien Grand wrote: > Hi Anshum, will you branch both branch_7x and branch_7_0 at the same > time? I think this is what we need to do but I'm asking in case you > had planned differently. It seems like a better idea to create only branch_7x right now, and delay creating the

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Yes, I do plan to branch them at the same time. I think that is also what's documented :). On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 5:45 AM Adrien Grand wrote: > Hi Anshum, will you branch both branch_7x and branch_7_0 at the same time? > I think this is what we need to do but I'm asking in

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Hi Anshum, will you branch both branch_7x and branch_7_0 at the same time? I think this is what we need to do but I'm asking in case you had planned differently. Le mer. 31 mai 2017 à 20:17, Anshum Gupta a écrit : > We can certainly hold back cutting the branch, and/or

Re: Release planning for 7.0

We can certainly hold back cutting the branch, and/or release. I'm headed to Berlin Buzzwords next week so I'd most probably be cutting the branch over the next weekend or during the conference. I'll keep everyone posted about the 'when' and if there are more contributors who want me to hold back

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I think people are missing my point. I am _not_ advocating having "two major feature branches developed at once". I'm pointing out that between now and the 7.0 release (and possibly for a bit thereafter), there will be a number of JIRAs that _could_ be backported to a (future) 6.7 with virtually

Re: Release planning for 7.0

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, David Smiley wrote: > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 9:06 AM Shawn Heisey wrote: > >> > To me the best trade-off is to stop doing 6.x minor releases once 7.0 >> > is out. >> >> I did say it would be relatively safe to do

Re: Release planning for 7.0

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 9:06 AM Shawn Heisey wrote: > > To me the best trade-off is to stop doing 6.x minor releases once 7.0 > > is out. > > I did say it would be relatively safe to do bugfixes and backport > self-contained features in 6.x after 7.0 comes out as long as

Re: Release planning for 7.0

On 5/24/2017 1:44 AM, Adrien Grand wrote: > We said before that we could move it to the solr sub-folder so that > Solr can support them for one additional major release (it can be done > on top of Lucene, doesn't need to be supported in Lucene directly). > However it is probably important to do

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I'd like to have until June 2nd to finish up tickets for 6.7. That would give use a little leeway to get 6.7 released before starting the 7.0 release process around June 10th. Joel Bernstein http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Anshum Gupta

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Do we have an idea on what/when are we looking at w.r.t a 6.7 release? Bug fixes that follow are totally ok, and should be released but this is more about, when do we stop adding 'new features' to the 6x branch, even if that involves back-porting. Assuming that the 6.7 release would be some time

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Le mar. 23 mai 2017 à 20:01, Shawn Heisey a écrit : > What is our plan for legacy numerics in Solr 7.0? Looking at the > example configs in branch_6x, I see that they have been partially > converted to the point field types, but not fully. The _version_ field > and many

Re: Release planning for 7.0

On 5/23/2017 9:14 AM, Erick Erickson wrote: > Do others expect there to be a 6.7 release? I'm guessing there'll be a > 6.7, and maybe one or two 6.7.x releases while 7.x settles down and/or > we want to put a bow on the 6x code line. > > Really a plea for people not to assume that the 6x code line

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Adrien: Right, thus my "if it's easy" clause ;) I'm not suggesting at all that we go very far down this road, more "if it merges cleanly and makes sense, backport. Maybe. If you feel like it". And I'm _really_ not suggesting that we try to back-port anything that would make our lives harder,

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I would like to have a 6.7 release if possible, to wrap up some features for users in the 6x branch. Joel Bernstein http://joelsolr.blogspot.com/ On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Adrien Grand wrote: > Le mar. 23 mai 2017 à 17:15, Erick Erickson a >

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Le mar. 23 mai 2017 à 17:15, Erick Erickson a écrit : > Do others expect there to be a 6.7 release? I'm guessing there'll be a > 6.7, and maybe one or two 6.7.x releases while 7.x settles down and/or > we want to put a bow on the 6x code line. > Once 7.0 is out,

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Agreed; I plan to back port some issues on occasion to 6.x still. On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:15 AM Erick Erickson wrote: > Do others expect there to be a 6.7 release? I'm guessing there'll be a > 6.7, and maybe one or two 6.7.x releases while 7.x settles down and/or >

Re: Release planning for 7.0

Do others expect there to be a 6.7 release? I'm guessing there'll be a 6.7, and maybe one or two 6.7.x releases while 7.x settles down and/or we want to put a bow on the 6x code line. Really a plea for people not to assume that the 6x code line is moribund for a bit, and merge changes into 6x if

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I plan on cutting the release branch on (or right after 10th of June). Does that sound reasonable to everyone? There are 4 Blocker/Critical issues in Solr at the moment w/ fix version 'master':

Re: Release planning for 7.0

I think it would be great if 7.0 could have a platform independent solr.in.xx format https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-7871 contains work in progress… Anyone want to help? -- Jan Høydahl, search solution architect Cominvent AS -

Re: Release planning for 7.0

+1 I'd like to get https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7730 in as it can only be done in a major release. I'll review our documentation as well after all the changes we made to doc values and similarities. Le jeu. 4 mai 2017 à 23:20, Noble Paul a écrit : > +1 > >

Re: Release planning for 7.0

+1 On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:28 AM, Anshum Gupta wrote: > That sounds great Tomas. > > Also, if we go with my suggestion, everyone has one more month before the > branch is cut. > > -Anshum > > On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:51 AM Tomás Fernández Löbbe >

Re: Release planning for 7.0

That sounds great Tomas. Also, if we go with my suggestion, everyone has one more month before the branch is cut. -Anshum On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:51 AM Tomás Fernández Löbbe wrote: > One thing I'd like to get to 7.0 is replica types (SOLR-10233). Most of > the work is

Re: Release planning for 7.0

One thing I'd like to get to 7.0 is replica types (SOLR-10233). Most of the work is done, I'm working on more tests right now. If everything works fine I should be committing that some time next week. Tomás On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 10:33 AM, David Smiley wrote: > +1 > >

Re: Release planning for 7.0

+1 On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 11:56 AM Anshum Gupta wrote: > With 6.6 in the pipeline, I think sometime in June would be a good time to > cut a release branch. What do all of you think? > -- Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker LinkedIn:

Re: Release planning for 7.0

> With 6.6 in the pipeline, I think sometime in June would be a good time to cut a release > branch. What do all of you think? +1 On Wed, May 3, 2017 at 9:11 PM, Anshum Gupta wrote: > Hi, > > It's May already, and with 6.6 lined up, I think we should start planning > on