Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
nd just what the words >>>>> say. >>>>>>>> JDK >>>>>>>>>>> LTS. Ubuntu LTS. etc... I think it would be less confusing to >> stay >>>>>> with >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> stable/latest labels we have had in the past and plan ahead a >> bit >>>>> in >>>>>>>>>> terms >>>>>>>>>>> of giving notice when releases will be removed from support. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 3:12 AM Andor Molnar >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Andrew, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think that wasn’t a general plan from the community at that >>>>> time, >>>>>>>> just >>>>>>>>>>>> my opinion based on how long 3.4 was the stable release of >>>>> ZooKeeper >>>>>>>> (4 >>>>>>>>>>>> years). Since then the release schedule has become much faster >>> and >>>>>> to >>>>>>>> be >>>>>>>>>>>> honest I’m not participating in it. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 >> is >>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>> “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of >>>>> patches >>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>> improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for >>>>> upgrade, >>>>>> so >>>>>>>>>>>> announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not >>>>> necessarily >>>>>>>> bad. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) >> terms, >>> I >>>>>>>> think >>>>>>>>>>>> the following could also be considered for the community: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Now: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> master >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> 3.7 >>>>>>>>>>>> 3.6 >>>>>>>>>>>> 3.5 LTS >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> 3.4 EoL >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Can become: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> master >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> 3.8 LTS >>>>>>>>>>>> 3.7 >>>>>>>>>>>> 3.5 LTS >>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>> 3.6 EoL >>>>>>>>>>>> 3.4 EoL >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Andor >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell < >> apurt...@apache.org >>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a >>>>> whole, >>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe I have misunderstood this response: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli < >>>>>>>> eolive...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell < >>>>>> andrew.purt...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> ha >>>>>>>>>>>>>> scritto: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking >>>>> of a >>>>>>>>>>>> Hadoop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I >>>>>> believe >>>>>>>>>>>> there >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable >>>>> (LTS) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise >> of >>>>> LTS >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth >> is a >>>>>>>>>>>> timetable >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, >>>>> should >>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decide to EOL it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am sorry, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I forgot about such conversation. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you share some pointers ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs >>>>> 3.5 >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is willing to help. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much >> attention >>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to >>>>>> connect >>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>>>>>>> servers (and vice versa) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in >> the >>>>>>>>>>>> community, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> so from your response I understand that there is such >> interest. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for answering >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enrico >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli < >>>>>> eolive...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Key points: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and >> 3.7 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries >>>>>> upgrade >>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be >> stuck >>>>> if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Enrico >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>>>>> Andrew >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's what we’ve earned >>>>>>>>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? >>>>>>>>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on >>>>>>>>>>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
based on how long 3.4 was the stable release of > > >> ZooKeeper > > >>>>> (4 > > >>>>>>>>> years). Since then the release schedule has become much faster > > and > > >>> to > > >>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>> honest I’m not participating in it. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 > is > > >> the > > >>>>>>>>> “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of > > >> patches > > >>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>> improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for > > >> upgrade, > > >>> so > > >>>>>>>>> announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not > > >> necessarily > > >>>>> bad. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) > terms, > > I > > >>>>> think > > >>>>>>>>> the following could also be considered for the community: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Now: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> master > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>> 3.7 > > >>>>>>>>> 3.6 > > >>>>>>>>> 3.5 LTS > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>> 3.4 EoL > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Can become: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> master > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>> 3.8 LTS > > >>>>>>>>> 3.7 > > >>>>>>>>> 3.5 LTS > > >>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>> 3.6 EoL > > >>>>>>>>> 3.4 EoL > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> What do you think? > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Andor > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell < > apurt...@apache.org > > > > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a > > >> whole, > > >>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>>> maybe I have misunderstood this response: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli < > > >>>>> eolive...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell < > > >>> andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>> ha > > >>>>>>>>>>> scritto: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking > > >> of a > > >>>>>>>>> Hadoop > > >>>>>>>>>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I > > >>> believe > > >>>>>>>>> there > > >>>>>>>>>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable > > >> (LTS) > > >>>>>>>>>>> release. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise > of > > >> LTS > > >>>>>>>>>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth > is a > > >>>>>>>>> timetable > > >>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, > > >> should > > >>>>> you > > >>>>>>>>>>>> decide to EOL it. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> I am sorry, > > >>>>>>>>>>> I forgot about such conversation. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Can you share some pointers ? > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs > > >> 3.5 > > >>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>> is willing to help. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much > attention > > >>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to > > >>> connect > > >>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>> new > > >>>>>>>>>>> servers (and vice versa) > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in > the > > >>>>>>>>> community, > > >>>>>>>>>>> so from your response I understand that there is such > interest. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for answering > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Enrico > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli < > > >>> eolive...@gmail.com > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Key points: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and > 3.7 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries > > >>> upgrade > > >>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be > stuck > > >> if > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enrico > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>> Best regards, > > >>>>>>>>>> Andrew > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > > >>>>>>>>>> It's what we’ve earned > > >>>>>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > >>>>>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > > >>>>>>>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > >
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
nrico is about to release 3.8.0 soon, so we’ll end up having four > >>>>> versions in maintenance. What should we do with it to reduce the > >>>>> maintenance cost? > >>>>> > >>>>> Andor > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> On 2022. Feb 4., at 17:58, Patrick Hunt wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 8:19 AM Andor Molnar > >> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> More specifically? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Are you asking me? :-) "LTS" literally has a definition in > >> wikipedia: > >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_support > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Stable 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8 and EoL 3.5 at the end of the year (1st > of > >>>>> Jan, > >>>>>>> 2023)? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Andor > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 2022. Feb 1., at 16:41, Patrick Hunt wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> "LTS" typically has meaning for folks beyond just what the words > >> say. > >>>>> JDK > >>>>>>>> LTS. Ubuntu LTS. etc... I think it would be less confusing to stay > >>> with > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> stable/latest labels we have had in the past and plan ahead a bit > >> in > >>>>>>> terms > >>>>>>>> of giving notice when releases will be removed from support. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Patrick > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 3:12 AM Andor Molnar > >>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Hi Andrew, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> I think that wasn’t a general plan from the community at that > >> time, > >>>>> just > >>>>>>>>> my opinion based on how long 3.4 was the stable release of > >> ZooKeeper > >>>>> (4 > >>>>>>>>> years). Since then the release schedule has become much faster > and > >>> to > >>>>> be > >>>>>>>>> honest I’m not participating in it. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 is > >> the > >>>>>>>>> “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of > >> patches > >>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>> improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for > >> upgrade, > >>> so > >>>>>>>>> announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not > >> necessarily > >>>>> bad. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) terms, > I > >>>>> think > >>>>>>>>> the following could also be considered for the community: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Now: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> master > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> 3.7 > >>>>>>>>> 3.6 > >>>>>>>>> 3.5 LTS > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> 3.4 EoL > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Can become: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> master > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> 3.8 LTS > >>>>>>>>> 3.7 > >>>>>>>>> 3.5 LTS > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> 3.6 EoL > >>>>>>>>> 3.4 EoL > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> What do you think? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Andor > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell > > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a > >> whole, > >>>>> but > >>>>>>>>>> maybe I have misunderstood this response: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli < > >>>>> eolive...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell < > >>> andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>> ha > >>>>>>>>>>> scritto: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking > >> of a > >>>>>>>>> Hadoop > >>>>>>>>>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I > >>> believe > >>>>>>>>> there > >>>>>>>>>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable > >> (LTS) > >>>>>>>>>>> release. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of > >> LTS > >>>>>>>>>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a > >>>>>>>>> timetable > >>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, > >> should > >>>>> you > >>>>>>>>>>>> decide to EOL it. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I am sorry, > >>>>>>>>>>> I forgot about such conversation. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Can you share some pointers ? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs > >> 3.5 > >>>>> and > >>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>> is willing to help. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention > >>> to > >>>>>>>>>>> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to > >>> connect > >>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>> new > >>>>>>>>>>> servers (and vice versa) > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the > >>>>>>>>> community, > >>>>>>>>>>> so from your response I understand that there is such interest. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for answering > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Enrico > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli < > >>> eolive...@gmail.com > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Key points: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries > >>> upgrade > >>>>> is > >>>>>>>>>>>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > >>>>>>>>>>>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck > >> if > >>>>>>>>>>>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ? > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enrico > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>> Best regards, > >>>>>>>>>> Andrew > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > >>>>>>>>>> It's what we’ve earned > >>>>>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > >>>>>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > >>>>>>>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
2023)? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Andor >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 2022. Feb 1., at 16:41, Patrick Hunt wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "LTS" typically has meaning for folks beyond just what the words >> say. >>>>> JDK >>>>>>>> LTS. Ubuntu LTS. etc... I think it would be less confusing to stay >>> with >>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> stable/latest labels we have had in the past and plan ahead a bit >> in >>>>>>> terms >>>>>>>> of giving notice when releases will be removed from support. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 3:12 AM Andor Molnar >>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Andrew, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think that wasn’t a general plan from the community at that >> time, >>>>> just >>>>>>>>> my opinion based on how long 3.4 was the stable release of >> ZooKeeper >>>>> (4 >>>>>>>>> years). Since then the release schedule has become much faster and >>> to >>>>> be >>>>>>>>> honest I’m not participating in it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 is >> the >>>>>>>>> “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of >> patches >>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>> improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for >> upgrade, >>> so >>>>>>>>> announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not >> necessarily >>>>> bad. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) terms, I >>>>> think >>>>>>>>> the following could also be considered for the community: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Now: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> master >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> 3.7 >>>>>>>>> 3.6 >>>>>>>>> 3.5 LTS >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> 3.4 EoL >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Can become: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> master >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> 3.8 LTS >>>>>>>>> 3.7 >>>>>>>>> 3.5 LTS >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> 3.6 EoL >>>>>>>>> 3.4 EoL >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What do you think? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Andor >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a >> whole, >>>>> but >>>>>>>>>> maybe I have misunderstood this response: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli < >>>>> eolive...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell < >>> andrew.purt...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> ha >>>>>>>>>>> scritto: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking >> of a >>>>>>>>> Hadoop >>>>>>>>>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I >>> believe >>>>>>>>> there >>>>>>>>>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable >> (LTS) >>>>>>>>>>> release. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of >> LTS >>>>>>>>>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a >>>>>>>>> timetable >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, >> should >>>>> you >>>>>>>>>>>> decide to EOL it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am sorry, >>>>>>>>>>> I forgot about such conversation. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Can you share some pointers ? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs >> 3.5 >>>>> and >>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>> is willing to help. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention >>> to >>>>>>>>>>> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to >>> connect >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> new >>>>>>>>>>> servers (and vice versa) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the >>>>>>>>> community, >>>>>>>>>>> so from your response I understand that there is such interest. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for answering >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Enrico >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli < >>> eolive...@gmail.com >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>>>>>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. >>>>>>>>>>>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Key points: >>>>>>>>>>>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 >>>>>>>>>>>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries >>> upgrade >>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) >>>>>>>>>>>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck >> if >>>>>>>>>>>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Enrico >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>> Andrew >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - >>>>>>>>>> It's what we’ve earned >>>>>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? >>>>>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on >>>>>>>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
ot participating in it. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 is > the > > >>>>>> “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of > patches > > >>>> that > > >>>>>> improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for > upgrade, > > so > > >>>>>> announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not > necessarily > > >> bad. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) terms, I > > >> think > > >>>>>> the following could also be considered for the community: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Now: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> master > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> 3.7 > > >>>>>> 3.6 > > >>>>>> 3.5 LTS > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> 3.4 EoL > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Can become: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> master > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> 3.8 LTS > > >>>>>> 3.7 > > >>>>>> 3.5 LTS > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> 3.6 EoL > > >>>>>> 3.4 EoL > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> What do you think? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Andor > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a > whole, > > >> but > > >>>>>>> maybe I have misunderstood this response: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli < > > >> eolive...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell < > > andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > > >>>> ha > > >>>>>>>> scritto: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking > of a > > >>>>>> Hadoop > > >>>>>>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I > > believe > > >>>>>> there > > >>>>>>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable > (LTS) > > >>>>>>>> release. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of > LTS > > >>>>>>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a > > >>>>>> timetable > > >>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, > should > > >> you > > >>>>>>>>> decide to EOL it. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> I am sorry, > > >>>>>>>> I forgot about such conversation. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Can you share some pointers ? > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs > 3.5 > > >> and > > >>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>> is willing to help. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention > > to > > >>>>>>>> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to > > connect > > >>>> to > > >>>>>> new > > >>>>>>>> servers (and vice versa) > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the > > >>>>>> community, > > >>>>>>>> so from your response I understand that there is such interest. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Thanks for answering > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Enrico > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli < > > eolive...@gmail.com > > >>> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hello, > > >>>>>>>>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. > > >>>>>>>>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Key points: > > >>>>>>>>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 > > >>>>>>>>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries > > upgrade > > >> is > > >>>>>>>>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > > >>>>>>>>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck > if > > >>>>>>>>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ? > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Enrico > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>> Best regards, > > >>>>>>> Andrew > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > > >>>>>>> It's what we’ve earned > > >>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > >>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > > >>>>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > >> > > > > >
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
>> Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a whole, > >> but > >>>>>>> maybe I have misunderstood this response: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli < > >> eolive...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell < > andrew.purt...@gmail.com> > >>>> ha > >>>>>>>> scritto: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a > >>>>>> Hadoop > >>>>>>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I > believe > >>>>>> there > >>>>>>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) > >>>>>>>> release. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS > >>>>>>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a > >>>>>> timetable > >>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should > >> you > >>>>>>>>> decide to EOL it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I am sorry, > >>>>>>>> I forgot about such conversation. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Can you share some pointers ? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 > >> and > >>>>>> that > >>>>>>>> is willing to help. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention > to > >>>>>>>> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to > connect > >>>> to > >>>>>> new > >>>>>>>> servers (and vice versa) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the > >>>>>> community, > >>>>>>>> so from your response I understand that there is such interest. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks for answering > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Enrico > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli < > eolive...@gmail.com > >>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Hello, > >>>>>>>>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. > >>>>>>>>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Key points: > >>>>>>>>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 > >>>>>>>>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries > upgrade > >> is > >>>>>>>>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > >>>>>>>>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if > >>>>>>>>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Enrico > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> Best regards, > >>>>>>> Andrew > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > >>>>>>> It's what we’ve earned > >>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > >>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > >>>>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
gt;> “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of patches >>>> that >>>>>> improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for upgrade, so >>>>>> announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not necessarily >> bad. >>>>>> >>>>>> As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) terms, I >> think >>>>>> the following could also be considered for the community: >>>>>> >>>>>> Now: >>>>>> >>>>>> master >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 3.7 >>>>>> 3.6 >>>>>> 3.5 LTS >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 3.4 EoL >>>>>> >>>>>> Can become: >>>>>> >>>>>> master >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 3.8 LTS >>>>>> 3.7 >>>>>> 3.5 LTS >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 3.6 EoL >>>>>> 3.4 EoL >>>>>> >>>>>> In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. >>>>>> >>>>>> What do you think? >>>>>> >>>>>> Andor >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a whole, >> but >>>>>>> maybe I have misunderstood this response: >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli < >> eolive...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell >>>> ha >>>>>>>> scritto: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a >>>>>> Hadoop >>>>>>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe >>>>>> there >>>>>>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) >>>>>>>> release. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS >>>>>>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a >>>>>> timetable >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should >> you >>>>>>>>> decide to EOL it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I am sorry, >>>>>>>> I forgot about such conversation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Can you share some pointers ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 >> and >>>>>> that >>>>>>>> is willing to help. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention to >>>>>>>> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to connect >>>> to >>>>>> new >>>>>>>> servers (and vice versa) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the >>>>>> community, >>>>>>>> so from your response I understand that there is such interest. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks for answering >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Enrico >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli >> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hello, >>>>>>>>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. >>>>>>>>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Key points: >>>>>>>>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 >>>>>>>>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade >> is >>>>>>>>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) >>>>>>>>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if >>>>>>>>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thoughts ? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Enrico >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> Andrew >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - >>>>>>> It's what we’ve earned >>>>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? >>>>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on >>>>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
t;>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli < > eolive...@gmail.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell > >> ha > >>>>>> scritto: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a > >>>> Hadoop > >>>>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe > >>>> there > >>>>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) > >>>>>> release. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS > >>>>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a > >>>> timetable > >>>>>> to > >>>>>>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should > you > >>>>>>> decide to EOL it. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I am sorry, > >>>>>> I forgot about such conversation. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Can you share some pointers ? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 > and > >>>> that > >>>>>> is willing to help. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention to > >>>>>> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to connect > >> to > >>>> new > >>>>>> servers (and vice versa) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the > >>>> community, > >>>>>> so from your response I understand that there is such interest. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks for answering > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Enrico > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli > > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hello, > >>>>>>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. > >>>>>>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Key points: > >>>>>>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 > >>>>>>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade > is > >>>>>>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > >>>>>>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if > >>>>>>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thoughts ? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Enrico > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Best regards, > >>>>> Andrew > >>>>> > >>>>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > >>>>> It's what we’ve earned > >>>>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > >>>>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > >>>>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
Hi Pat, Yeah, I asked for a more specific suggestion from you. If we avoid using the LTS in ZooKeeper releases and stay with the stable/latest labels, how would you label the current maintained versions? Enrico is about to release 3.8.0 soon, so we’ll end up having four versions in maintenance. What should we do with it to reduce the maintenance cost? Andor > On 2022. Feb 4., at 17:58, Patrick Hunt wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 8:19 AM Andor Molnar wrote: > >> More specifically? >> > > Are you asking me? :-) "LTS" literally has a definition in wikipedia: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_support > > >> >> Stable 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8 and EoL 3.5 at the end of the year (1st of Jan, >> 2023)? >> >> Andor >> >> >> >>> On 2022. Feb 1., at 16:41, Patrick Hunt wrote: >>> >>> "LTS" typically has meaning for folks beyond just what the words say. JDK >>> LTS. Ubuntu LTS. etc... I think it would be less confusing to stay with >> the >>> stable/latest labels we have had in the past and plan ahead a bit in >> terms >>> of giving notice when releases will be removed from support. >>> >>> Patrick >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 3:12 AM Andor Molnar wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Andrew, >>>> >>>> I think that wasn’t a general plan from the community at that time, just >>>> my opinion based on how long 3.4 was the stable release of ZooKeeper (4 >>>> years). Since then the release schedule has become much faster and to be >>>> honest I’m not participating in it. >>>> >>>> As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 is the >>>> “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of patches >> that >>>> improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for upgrade, so >>>> announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not necessarily bad. >>>> >>>> As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) terms, I think >>>> the following could also be considered for the community: >>>> >>>> Now: >>>> >>>> master >>>> -- >>>> 3.7 >>>> 3.6 >>>> 3.5 LTS >>>> -- >>>> 3.4 EoL >>>> >>>> Can become: >>>> >>>> master >>>> -- >>>> 3.8 LTS >>>> 3.7 >>>> 3.5 LTS >>>> -- >>>> 3.6 EoL >>>> 3.4 EoL >>>> >>>> In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. >>>> >>>> What do you think? >>>> >>>> Andor >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell >> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a whole, but >>>>> maybe I have misunderstood this response: >>>>> >>>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell >> ha >>>>>> scritto: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a >>>> Hadoop >>>>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe >>>> there >>>>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) >>>>>> release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS >>>>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a >>>> timetable >>>>>> to >>>>>>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should you >>>>>>> decide to EOL it. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I am sorry, >>>>>> I forgot about such conversation. >>>>>> >>>>>> Can you share some pointers ? >>>>>> >>>>>> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 an
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
That's what I was getting at with asking about phrasing like "long supported" or LTS. The expectation is months or years longer than typical. ZooKeeper code lines have typically been supported for really long times. It is a strength of this project, in my opinion. Those of us who have been around for a while, if we hear "LTS" from you, we think years and years... Christopher from Accumulo had a good suggestion. Whatever you decide, document it. Will help with communication. Probably best to avoid use of the term "LTS" unless you plan on keeping that version around for several years. On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 8:59 AM Patrick Hunt wrote: > On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 8:19 AM Andor Molnar wrote: > > > More specifically? > > > > Are you asking me? :-) "LTS" literally has a definition in wikipedia: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_support > > > > > > Stable 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8 and EoL 3.5 at the end of the year (1st of Jan, > > 2023)? > > > > Andor > > > > > > > > > On 2022. Feb 1., at 16:41, Patrick Hunt wrote: > > > > > > "LTS" typically has meaning for folks beyond just what the words say. > JDK > > > LTS. Ubuntu LTS. etc... I think it would be less confusing to stay with > > the > > > stable/latest labels we have had in the past and plan ahead a bit in > > terms > > > of giving notice when releases will be removed from support. > > > > > > Patrick > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 3:12 AM Andor Molnar wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Andrew, > > >> > > >> I think that wasn’t a general plan from the community at that time, > just > > >> my opinion based on how long 3.4 was the stable release of ZooKeeper > (4 > > >> years). Since then the release schedule has become much faster and to > be > > >> honest I’m not participating in it. > > >> > > >> As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 is the > > >> “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of patches > > that > > >> improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for upgrade, so > > >> announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not necessarily > bad. > > >> > > >> As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) terms, I > think > > >> the following could also be considered for the community: > > >> > > >> Now: > > >> > > >> master > > >> -- > > >> 3.7 > > >> 3.6 > > >> 3.5 LTS > > >> -- > > >> 3.4 EoL > > >> > > >> Can become: > > >> > > >> master > > >> -- > > >> 3.8 LTS > > >> 3.7 > > >> 3.5 LTS > > >> -- > > >> 3.6 EoL > > >> 3.4 EoL > > >> > > >> In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. > > >> > > >> What do you think? > > >> > > >> Andor > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>> On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a whole, > but > > >>> maybe I have misunderstood this response: > > >>> > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli < > eolive...@gmail.com> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell > > ha > > >>>> scritto: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a > > >> Hadoop > > >>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe > > >> there > > >>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) > > >>>> release. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS > > >>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a > > >> timetable > > >>>> to > > >>>>> EO
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 8:19 AM Andor Molnar wrote: > More specifically? > Are you asking me? :-) "LTS" literally has a definition in wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_support > > Stable 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8 and EoL 3.5 at the end of the year (1st of Jan, > 2023)? > > Andor > > > > > On 2022. Feb 1., at 16:41, Patrick Hunt wrote: > > > > "LTS" typically has meaning for folks beyond just what the words say. JDK > > LTS. Ubuntu LTS. etc... I think it would be less confusing to stay with > the > > stable/latest labels we have had in the past and plan ahead a bit in > terms > > of giving notice when releases will be removed from support. > > > > Patrick > > > > On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 3:12 AM Andor Molnar wrote: > > > >> Hi Andrew, > >> > >> I think that wasn’t a general plan from the community at that time, just > >> my opinion based on how long 3.4 was the stable release of ZooKeeper (4 > >> years). Since then the release schedule has become much faster and to be > >> honest I’m not participating in it. > >> > >> As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 is the > >> “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of patches > that > >> improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for upgrade, so > >> announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not necessarily bad. > >> > >> As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) terms, I think > >> the following could also be considered for the community: > >> > >> Now: > >> > >> master > >> -- > >> 3.7 > >> 3.6 > >> 3.5 LTS > >> -- > >> 3.4 EoL > >> > >> Can become: > >> > >> master > >> -- > >> 3.8 LTS > >> 3.7 > >> 3.5 LTS > >> -- > >> 3.6 EoL > >> 3.4 EoL > >> > >> In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. > >> > >> What do you think? > >> > >> Andor > >> > >> > >> > >>> On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell > wrote: > >>> > >>> Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a whole, but > >>> maybe I have misunderstood this response: > >>> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 > >>> > >>> > >>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell > ha > >>>> scritto: > >>>> > >>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a > >> Hadoop > >>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe > >> there > >>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) > >>>> release. > >>>>> > >>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS > >>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a > >> timetable > >>>> to > >>>>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should you > >>>>> decide to EOL it. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I am sorry, > >>>> I forgot about such conversation. > >>>> > >>>> Can you share some pointers ? > >>>> > >>>> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 and > >> that > >>>> is willing to help. > >>>> > >>>> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention to > >>>> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to connect > to > >> new > >>>> servers (and vice versa) > >>>> > >>>> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the > >> community, > >>>> so from your response I understand that there is such interest. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks for answering > >>>> > >>>> Enrico > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hello, > >>>>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. > >>>>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Key points: > >>>>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 > >>>>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade is > >>>>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > >>>>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if > >>>>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thoughts ? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Enrico > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Best regards, > >>> Andrew > >>> > >>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > >>> It's what we’ve earned > >>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > >>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > >>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > >> > >> > >
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
More specifically? Stable 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8 and EoL 3.5 at the end of the year (1st of Jan, 2023)? Andor > On 2022. Feb 1., at 16:41, Patrick Hunt wrote: > > "LTS" typically has meaning for folks beyond just what the words say. JDK > LTS. Ubuntu LTS. etc... I think it would be less confusing to stay with the > stable/latest labels we have had in the past and plan ahead a bit in terms > of giving notice when releases will be removed from support. > > Patrick > > On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 3:12 AM Andor Molnar wrote: > >> Hi Andrew, >> >> I think that wasn’t a general plan from the community at that time, just >> my opinion based on how long 3.4 was the stable release of ZooKeeper (4 >> years). Since then the release schedule has become much faster and to be >> honest I’m not participating in it. >> >> As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 is the >> “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of patches that >> improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for upgrade, so >> announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not necessarily bad. >> >> As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) terms, I think >> the following could also be considered for the community: >> >> Now: >> >> master >> -- >> 3.7 >> 3.6 >> 3.5 LTS >> -- >> 3.4 EoL >> >> Can become: >> >> master >> -- >> 3.8 LTS >> 3.7 >> 3.5 LTS >> -- >> 3.6 EoL >> 3.4 EoL >> >> In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. >> >> What do you think? >> >> Andor >> >> >> >>> On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell wrote: >>> >>> Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a whole, but >>> maybe I have misunderstood this response: >>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell ha >>>> scritto: >>>> >>>>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a >> Hadoop >>>>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe >> there >>>>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) >>>> release. >>>>> >>>>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS >>>>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a >> timetable >>>> to >>>>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should you >>>>> decide to EOL it. >>>> >>>> >>>> I am sorry, >>>> I forgot about such conversation. >>>> >>>> Can you share some pointers ? >>>> >>>> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 and >> that >>>> is willing to help. >>>> >>>> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention to >>>> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to connect to >> new >>>> servers (and vice versa) >>>> >>>> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the >> community, >>>> so from your response I understand that there is such interest. >>>> >>>> Thanks for answering >>>> >>>> Enrico >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hello, >>>>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. >>>>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. >>>>>> >>>>>> Key points: >>>>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 >>>>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade is >>>>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) >>>>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if >>>>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 >>>>>> >>>>>> Thoughts ? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Enrico >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Andrew >>> >>> Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - >>> It's what we’ve earned >>> Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? >>> Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on >>> - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse >> >>
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
"LTS" typically has meaning for folks beyond just what the words say. JDK LTS. Ubuntu LTS. etc... I think it would be less confusing to stay with the stable/latest labels we have had in the past and plan ahead a bit in terms of giving notice when releases will be removed from support. Patrick On Tue, Feb 1, 2022 at 3:12 AM Andor Molnar wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > I think that wasn’t a general plan from the community at that time, just > my opinion based on how long 3.4 was the stable release of ZooKeeper (4 > years). Since then the release schedule has become much faster and to be > honest I’m not participating in it. > > As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 is the > “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of patches that > improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for upgrade, so > announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not necessarily bad. > > As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) terms, I think > the following could also be considered for the community: > > Now: > > master > -- > 3.7 > 3.6 > 3.5 LTS > -- > 3.4 EoL > > Can become: > > master > -- > 3.8 LTS > 3.7 > 3.5 LTS > -- > 3.6 EoL > 3.4 EoL > > In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. > > What do you think? > > Andor > > > > > On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell wrote: > > > > Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a whole, but > > maybe I have misunderstood this response: > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli > > wrote: > > > >> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell ha > >> scritto: > >> > >>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a > Hadoop > >>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe > there > >>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) > >> release. > >>> > >>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS > >>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a > timetable > >> to > >>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should you > >>> decide to EOL it. > >> > >> > >> I am sorry, > >> I forgot about such conversation. > >> > >> Can you share some pointers ? > >> > >> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 and > that > >> is willing to help. > >> > >> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention to > >> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to connect to > new > >> servers (and vice versa) > >> > >> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the > community, > >> so from your response I understand that there is such interest. > >> > >> Thanks for answering > >> > >> Enrico > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hello, > >>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. > >>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > >>>> > >>>> Key points: > >>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 > >>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade is > >>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > >>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if > >>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 > >>>> > >>>> Thoughts ? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Enrico > >>> > >> > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Andrew > > > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - > >It's what we’ve earned > > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > > - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse > >
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
Hi Andrew, I think that wasn’t a general plan from the community at that time, just my opinion based on how long 3.4 was the stable release of ZooKeeper (4 years). Since then the release schedule has become much faster and to be honest I’m not participating in it. As mentioned 3.6 and 3.7 releases are not much different. 3.6 is the “Facebook” version which is well tested and contains lots of patches that improves robustness. Both versions are good candidates for upgrade, so announcing 3.5 EoL (at least half year from now) is not necessarily bad. As an alternative, staying with the LT(S|M) / non-LT(S|M) terms, I think the following could also be considered for the community: Now: master -- 3.7 3.6 3.5 LTS -- 3.4 EoL Can become: master -- 3.8 LTS 3.7 3.5 LTS -- 3.6 EoL 3.4 EoL In order to keep the number of maintained branches low. What do you think? Andor > On 2022. Jan 31., at 19:41, Andrew Purtell wrote: > > Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a whole, but > maybe I have misunderstood this response: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 > > > On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli > wrote: > >> Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell ha >> scritto: >> >>> Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a Hadoop >>> JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe there >>> have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) >> release. >>> >>> A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS >>> untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a timetable >> to >>> EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should you >>> decide to EOL it. >> >> >> I am sorry, >> I forgot about such conversation. >> >> Can you share some pointers ? >> >> No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 and that >> is willing to help. >> >> Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention to >> compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to connect to new >> servers (and vice versa) >> >> I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the community, >> so from your response I understand that there is such interest. >> >> Thanks for answering >> >> Enrico >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello, >>>> We are going to release 3.8.0. >>>> It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. >>>> >>>> Key points: >>>> - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 >>>> - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade is >>>> awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) >>>> - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if >>>> requested to upgrade to 3.6 >>>> >>>> Thoughts ? >>>> >>>> >>>> Enrico >>> >> > > > -- > Best regards, > Andrew > > Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - >It's what we’ve earned > Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? > Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on > - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
Just to be clear I meant 'you' as the ZooKeeper project as a whole, but maybe I have misunderstood this response: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-17612?focusedCommentId=17311792=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-17311792 On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 10:29 AM Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell ha > scritto: > > > Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a Hadoop > > JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe there > > have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) > release. > > > > A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS > > untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a timetable > to > > EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should you > > decide to EOL it. > > > I am sorry, > I forgot about such conversation. > > Can you share some pointers ? > > No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 and that > is willing to help. > > Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention to > compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to connect to new > servers (and vice versa) > > I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the community, > so from your response I understand that there is such interest. > > Thanks for answering > > Enrico > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli > > wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > We are going to release 3.8.0. > > > It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > > > > > > Key points: > > > - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 > > > - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade is > > > awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > > > - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if > > > requested to upgrade to 3.6 > > > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > > > > Enrico > > > -- Best regards, Andrew Unrest, ignorance distilled, nihilistic imbeciles - It's what we’ve earned Welcome, apocalypse, what’s taken you so long? Bring us the fitting end that we’ve been counting on - A23, Welcome, Apocalypse
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
Apache Accumulo has gone through some similar discussions over the years. What we have come up with is https://accumulo.apache.org/contributor/versioning.html (We avoided "LTS", because we don't provide "support" in the commercial sense, instead using the term "LTM" for long-term maintenance to indicate our intent to maintain with patches, but it's essentially the same kind of thing) Basically, we: * define our API (https://accumulo.apache.org/api/) and use SemVer as much as possible * apply patches to at least 1, and at most 2, LTM releases at a time * EOL the previous LTM release a year after the next one is released, to give an entire year for people to transition while still receiving patches * non-LTM releases are effectively EOL immediately, but can be used as stepping stones to the next LTM release; it's not that they won't receive patches at all, but that patches will be rolled into the current development for the next release, rather than backported to that version This helps a lot with reducing the developer workload to maintain multiple branches, communicates our intent to patch, provides predictable update paths, and gives users the choice to hop from one LTM release to the next or to follow the non-LTM releases to adopt new features more quickly. If ZK 3.5 is considered an "LTS" release, and if ZK devs wanted to do something similar, I would recommend maybe marking 3.7 as the next "LTS" release, and EOL'ing 3.5 either 1 year from now, or 1 year from 3.7.0's release date (which is coming up in a few months). You could either make 3.6 an LTS release if you wanted to maintain 2-3 LTS releases at a time instead of 1-2 like Accumulo does. Or you could EOL 3.6 when you EOL 3.5, so you can focus on 3.7 as the current LTS. There's lots of options to go with, but something along these lines, documented, could be very useful for users and developers/contributors. On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 1:29 PM Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell ha > scritto: > > > Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a Hadoop > > JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe there > > have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) > release. > > > > A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS > > untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a timetable > to > > EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should you > > decide to EOL it. > > > I am sorry, > I forgot about such conversation. > > Can you share some pointers ? > > No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 and that > is willing to help. > > Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention to > compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to connect to new > servers (and vice versa) > > I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the community, > so from your response I understand that there is such interest. > > Thanks for answering > > Enrico > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli > > wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > We are going to release 3.8.0. > > > It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > > > > > > Key points: > > > - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 > > > - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade is > > > awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > > > - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if > > > requested to upgrade to 3.6 > > > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > > > > Enrico > > >
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
Il Dom 30 Gen 2022, 17:51 Andrew Purtell ha scritto: > Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a Hadoop > JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe there > have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) release. > > A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS > untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a timetable to > EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should you > decide to EOL it. I am sorry, I forgot about such conversation. Can you share some pointers ? No problem from my side as soon as there is someone who needs 3.5 and that is willing to help. Our codebase is pretty stable and we usually pay much attention to compatibility. So I am sure that 3.5 clients will be able to connect to new servers (and vice versa) I opened up this discussion to see how much interest is in the community, so from your response I understand that there is such interest. Thanks for answering Enrico > > > > On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > We are going to release 3.8.0. > > It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > > > > Key points: > > - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 > > - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade is > > awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > > - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if > > requested to upgrade to 3.6 > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > > > Enrico >
Re: Moving 3.5 to EOL
Previously in various contexts - specifically, I am thinking of a Hadoop JIRA where we once had a conversation on this topic, but I believe there have been others - you have declared 3.5 a long term stable (LTS) release. A sudden EOL of an LTS is jarring and makes future promise of LTS untrustworthy. What I would recommend for what it’s worth is a timetable to EOL of 3.5 that is reasonably long, like one or two years, should you decide to EOL it. > On Jan 30, 2022, at 5:00 AM, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > Hello, > We are going to release 3.8.0. > It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. > > Key points: > - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 > - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade is > awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) > - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if > requested to upgrade to 3.6 > > Thoughts ? > > > Enrico
Moving 3.5 to EOL
Hello, We are going to release 3.8.0. It is time to think about moving 3.5 to EOL. Key points: - we already have a few other "active" branches, 3.6 and 3.7 - 3.5 still has "ant" files, and cherry picking libraries upgrade is awkward (you always have to create a separate patch) - moving to 3.6 is quite easy, so people should not be stuck if requested to upgrade to 3.6 Thoughts ? Enrico
