Re: What should we do with the 6x code line?
If someone happens to step forward to be a release manager for 6.7, someone (could be the same someone, or someone else) needs to also step forward to do the Ref Guide for 6.7. I'm the one that usually does most of the work for the Solr Ref Guide, and I don't have time in the next 2 months to do 6.7 and 7.0 and my day job. If no one steps up to be RM for the Ref Guide, then I'm -1 on a 6.7. I also don't want it to disrupt the 7.0 release at all - if there's even the slightest chance that starting 6.7 now will delay 7.0 further, I don't want to do 6.7. On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 2:37 AM, Adrien Grand wrote: > Le jeu. 10 août 2017 à 15:52, Erick Erickson a > écrit : >> >> I've never understood this. Why? I realize we don't want to keep >> release 6.x forever, but what is it about a week in this case that's >> so horrible? We're not talking about introducing back-compat issues >> here. > > > We only have backward-compatibility tests. If the new version to be released > is greater than all other versions that have ever be released, this is just > fine. However if we release an older version, we need to make sure not only > that it can read older indices, which tests check automatically (they don't > test all cases, but enough to give us good confidence), but also that all > greater versions can read indices generated by this version (forward > compatibility), which falls under the responsibility of the release manager > since it is not automatically tested. In my opinion we should not take the > risk: let's just produce sequential releases and recommend users to use the > latest version. > > I see 7.0 needs to be delayed a bit more to fix some JMX issue, so this > gives us a window in case someone wants to be a RM for 6.7 without delaying > 7.0, but in that case let's build a RC and start a vote as soon as possible. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: What should we do with the 6x code line?
Le jeu. 10 août 2017 à 15:52, Erick Erickson a écrit : > I've never understood this. Why? I realize we don't want to keep > release 6.x forever, but what is it about a week in this case that's > so horrible? We're not talking about introducing back-compat issues > here. > We only have backward-compatibility tests. If the new version to be released is greater than all other versions that have ever be released, this is just fine. However if we release an older version, we need to make sure not only that it can read older indices, which tests check automatically (they don't test all cases, but enough to give us good confidence), but also that all greater versions can read indices generated by this version (forward compatibility), which falls under the responsibility of the release manager since it is not automatically tested. In my opinion we should not take the risk: let's just produce sequential releases and recommend users to use the latest version. I see 7.0 needs to be delayed a bit more to fix some JMX issue, so this gives us a window in case someone wants to be a RM for 6.7 without delaying 7.0, but in that case let's build a RC and start a vote as soon as possible.
Re: What should we do with the 6x code line?
Well, unfortunately I'm headed off on a 10 day vacation next week. Mostly I'm trying to make sure we make a conscious decision about 6.7 rather than just let it slide until after 7.0 then regret not putting the effort in now. On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 9:42 AM, Anshum Gupta wrote: > Just out of curiosity, do we have a plan here? Erick, I assume you are > willing to work on the release? > > As much as I am not convinced with the idea of the 6.7 release, I wouldn't > oppose it and would want to work with whoever is the release manager. > > -Anshum > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 6:52 AM Erick Erickson > wrote: >> >> I've never understood this. Why? I realize we don't want to keep >> release 6.x forever, but what is it about a week in this case that's >> so horrible? We're not talking about introducing back-compat issues >> here. >> >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:43 AM, Adrien Grand wrote: >> > Releasing 6.7 means we cannot start the 7.0 release process until 6.7 is >> > out. Do we really want to delay 7.0 even more? I won't object to >> > releasing >> > 6.7 but if we want to do it let's get a vote started today. >> > >> > Le mer. 9 août 2017 à 22:31, Jan Høydahl a écrit >> > : >> >> >> >> +1 >> >> >> >> >> >> Den 9. aug. 2017 kl. 20.18 skrev David Smiley >> >> : >> >> >> >> +1 >> >> I think a 6.7 release would be very good. >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:46 PM Mike Drob wrote: >> >>> >> >>> +1 >> >>> >> >>> Release early, release often! >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Erick Erickson >> >>> >> >>> wrote: >> >> Solr and Lucene have had fixes backported to 6x (not 6.6) since the >> 7.0 label was set, most in Solr. Some of the fixes are useful "in the >> field", I've back-ported some of them myself. >> >> What objections are there to a 6.7 release? We'd always prefer to >> release nothing except important bug fixes on a prior branch, but the >> release process for 7.0 has taken some time and changes have >> accumulated. >> >> This might be the last, best time to wrap up 6x with a 6.7 as much as >> we can before officially releasing 7.0. >> >> What do people think? >> >> Erick >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> >> >>> >> >> -- >> >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker >> >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: >> >> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: What should we do with the 6x code line?
Just out of curiosity, do we have a plan here? Erick, I assume you are willing to work on the release? As much as I am not convinced with the idea of the 6.7 release, I wouldn't oppose it and would want to work with whoever is the release manager. -Anshum On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 6:52 AM Erick Erickson wrote: > I've never understood this. Why? I realize we don't want to keep > release 6.x forever, but what is it about a week in this case that's > so horrible? We're not talking about introducing back-compat issues > here. > > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:43 AM, Adrien Grand wrote: > > Releasing 6.7 means we cannot start the 7.0 release process until 6.7 is > > out. Do we really want to delay 7.0 even more? I won't object to > releasing > > 6.7 but if we want to do it let's get a vote started today. > > > > Le mer. 9 août 2017 à 22:31, Jan Høydahl a > écrit : > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> > >> Den 9. aug. 2017 kl. 20.18 skrev David Smiley >: > >> > >> +1 > >> I think a 6.7 release would be very good. > >> > >> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:46 PM Mike Drob wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 > >>> > >>> Release early, release often! > >>> > >>> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Erick Erickson < > erickerick...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > > Solr and Lucene have had fixes backported to 6x (not 6.6) since the > 7.0 label was set, most in Solr. Some of the fixes are useful "in the > field", I've back-ported some of them myself. > > What objections are there to a 6.7 release? We'd always prefer to > release nothing except important bug fixes on a prior branch, but the > release process for 7.0 has taken some time and changes have > accumulated. > > This might be the last, best time to wrap up 6x with a 6.7 as much as > we can before officially releasing 7.0. > > What do people think? > > Erick > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > >>> > >> -- > >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker > >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: > >> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
Re: What should we do with the 6x code line?
I've never understood this. Why? I realize we don't want to keep release 6.x forever, but what is it about a week in this case that's so horrible? We're not talking about introducing back-compat issues here. On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:43 AM, Adrien Grand wrote: > Releasing 6.7 means we cannot start the 7.0 release process until 6.7 is > out. Do we really want to delay 7.0 even more? I won't object to releasing > 6.7 but if we want to do it let's get a vote started today. > > Le mer. 9 août 2017 à 22:31, Jan Høydahl a écrit : >> >> +1 >> >> >> Den 9. aug. 2017 kl. 20.18 skrev David Smiley : >> >> +1 >> I think a 6.7 release would be very good. >> >> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:46 PM Mike Drob wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> Release early, release often! >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Erick Erickson >>> wrote: Solr and Lucene have had fixes backported to 6x (not 6.6) since the 7.0 label was set, most in Solr. Some of the fixes are useful "in the field", I've back-ported some of them myself. What objections are there to a 6.7 release? We'd always prefer to release nothing except important bug fixes on a prior branch, but the release process for 7.0 has taken some time and changes have accumulated. This might be the last, best time to wrap up 6x with a 6.7 as much as we can before officially releasing 7.0. What do people think? Erick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>> >> -- >> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker >> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: >> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: What should we do with the 6x code line?
Releasing 6.7 means we cannot start the 7.0 release process until 6.7 is out. Do we really want to delay 7.0 even more? I won't object to releasing 6.7 but if we want to do it let's get a vote started today. Le mer. 9 août 2017 à 22:31, Jan Høydahl a écrit : > +1 > > > Den 9. aug. 2017 kl. 20.18 skrev David Smiley : > > +1 > I think a 6.7 release would be very good. > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:46 PM Mike Drob wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Release early, release often! >> >> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Erick Erickson >> wrote: >> >>> Solr and Lucene have had fixes backported to 6x (not 6.6) since the >>> 7.0 label was set, most in Solr. Some of the fixes are useful "in the >>> field", I've back-ported some of them myself. >>> >>> What objections are there to a 6.7 release? We'd always prefer to >>> release nothing except important bug fixes on a prior branch, but the >>> release process for 7.0 has taken some time and changes have >>> accumulated. >>> >>> This might be the last, best time to wrap up 6x with a 6.7 as much as >>> we can before officially releasing 7.0. >>> >>> What do people think? >>> >>> Erick >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>> >>> >> -- > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com > >
Re: What should we do with the 6x code line?
+1 > Den 9. aug. 2017 kl. 20.18 skrev David Smiley : > > +1 > I think a 6.7 release would be very good. > >> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:46 PM Mike Drob wrote: >> +1 >> >> Release early, release often! >> >>> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Erick Erickson >>> wrote: >>> Solr and Lucene have had fixes backported to 6x (not 6.6) since the >>> 7.0 label was set, most in Solr. Some of the fixes are useful "in the >>> field", I've back-ported some of them myself. >>> >>> What objections are there to a 6.7 release? We'd always prefer to >>> release nothing except important bug fixes on a prior branch, but the >>> release process for 7.0 has taken some time and changes have >>> accumulated. >>> >>> This might be the last, best time to wrap up 6x with a 6.7 as much as >>> we can before officially releasing 7.0. >>> >>> What do people think? >>> >>> Erick >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>> >> > > -- > Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker > LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: > http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
Re: What should we do with the 6x code line?
+1 I think a 6.7 release would be very good. On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 5:46 PM Mike Drob wrote: > +1 > > Release early, release often! > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Erick Erickson > wrote: > >> Solr and Lucene have had fixes backported to 6x (not 6.6) since the >> 7.0 label was set, most in Solr. Some of the fixes are useful "in the >> field", I've back-ported some of them myself. >> >> What objections are there to a 6.7 release? We'd always prefer to >> release nothing except important bug fixes on a prior branch, but the >> release process for 7.0 has taken some time and changes have >> accumulated. >> >> This might be the last, best time to wrap up 6x with a 6.7 as much as >> we can before officially releasing 7.0. >> >> What do people think? >> >> Erick >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> >> > -- Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com
Re: What should we do with the 6x code line?
+1 Release early, release often! On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Erick Erickson wrote: > Solr and Lucene have had fixes backported to 6x (not 6.6) since the > 7.0 label was set, most in Solr. Some of the fixes are useful "in the > field", I've back-ported some of them myself. > > What objections are there to a 6.7 release? We'd always prefer to > release nothing except important bug fixes on a prior branch, but the > release process for 7.0 has taken some time and changes have > accumulated. > > This might be the last, best time to wrap up 6x with a 6.7 as much as > we can before officially releasing 7.0. > > What do people think? > > Erick > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
What should we do with the 6x code line?
Solr and Lucene have had fixes backported to 6x (not 6.6) since the 7.0 label was set, most in Solr. Some of the fixes are useful "in the field", I've back-ported some of them myself. What objections are there to a 6.7 release? We'd always prefer to release nothing except important bug fixes on a prior branch, but the release process for 7.0 has taken some time and changes have accumulated. This might be the last, best time to wrap up 6x with a 6.7 as much as we can before officially releasing 7.0. What do people think? Erick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
