Thanks , another question(s): why is this released marked 'unreleased' ? https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SOLR/versions/12335718 how is it different from : https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SOLR/versions/12341601 (i guess this is duplicate and will not be used)
I was expecting to see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11297 in https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SOLR/versions/12341052 but couldn't locate it. Regards Nawab On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > Not quite. Ongoing development always occurs on the *.x branch. > > When the release manager (RM) decides to cut a release, they set a > label on the *.x branch. So in this case, when Anshum volunteered to > create 7.0, he picked a time and set the branch_7_0 label pointing at > the then-7x branch. > > Thereafter, further development went on the branch_7x code line, with > some selected important improvements being backported to branch_7_0. > > One further point is let's say a critical must-fix problem is > discovered in 7.0. Fixes will be committed on branch_7_0 and branch_7x > and any point releases (i.e. 7.0.1) will be cut from branch_7_0. > > There's actually one more step since development usually occurs on > master, this is the complete process: > > do development on "master" (the future 8.0) > > commit > > merge with branch_7x > > commit > > if it's a super-critical bug merge with branch_7_0 > > Best, > Erick > > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Nawab Zada Asad Iqbal > <khi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks Yonik and Erick. > > > > That is helpful. > > I am slightly confused about the branch name conventions. I expected 7x > to > > be named as branch_7_0 , am i misunderstanding something? Similar to > > branch_6_6 (for 6.6.x onwards) . > > > > Regards > > Nawab > > > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Yonik Seeley <ysee...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> One can also use a nightly snapshot build to try out the latest stuff: > >> 7.x: https://builds.apache.org/job/Solr-Artifacts-7.x/ > >> lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/solr/package/ > >> 8.0: https://builds.apache.org/job/Solr-Artifacts-master/ > >> lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/solr/package/ > >> > >> -Yonik > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Erick Erickson > >> <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > There's nothing preventing you from getting/compiling the latest Solr > >> > 7x (what will be 7.1) for your own use. There's information here: > >> > https://wiki.apache.org/solr/HowToContribute > >> > > >> > Basically, you get the code from Git (instructions provided at the > >> > link above) and execute the "ant package" command from the solr > >> > directory. After things churn for a while you should have the tgz and > >> > zip files just as though you have downloaded them from the Apache > >> > Wiki. You need Java 1.8 JDK and ant installed, and the first time you > >> > try to compile you may see instructions to execute an ant target that > >> > downloads ivy. > >> > > >> > One note, there was a comment recently that you may have to get > >> > ivy-2.4.0.jar to have the "ant package" complete successfully. > >> > > >> > Best, > >> > Erick > >> > > >> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Steve Rowe <sar...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Hi Nawab, > >> >> > >> >> Committership is a prerequisite for the Lucene/Solr release manager > >> role. > >> >> > >> >> Some info here about the release process: <https://wiki.apache.org/ > >> lucene-java/ReleaseTodo> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> Steve > >> >> www.lucidworks.com > >> >> > >> >>> On Sep 26, 2017, at 11:28 AM, Nawab Zada Asad Iqbal < > khi...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> Where can I learn more about this process? I am not a committer but > I > >> am > >> >>> wondering if I know enough to do it. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> Thanks > >> >>> Nawab > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:23 PM, Erick Erickson < > >> erickerick...@gmail.com> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> In a word "no". Basically whenever a committer feels like there are > >> >>>> enough changes to warrant spinning a new version, they volunteer. > >> >>>> Nobody has stepped up to do that yet, although I expect it to be in > >> >>>> the next 2-3 months, but that's only a guess. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Best, > >> >>>> Erick > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Nawab Zada Asad Iqbal < > >> khi...@gmail.com> > >> >>>> wrote: > >> >>>>> Hi, > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> How are the release dates decided for new versions, are they > known in > >> >>>>> advance? > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Thanks > >> >>>>> Nawab > >> >>>> > >> >> > >> >
