All Phoenix devs/users (in addition to SFDC and Cloudera), please feel free to provide your opinions on whether you are using 4.x versions and what your future plans look like, what category of issues you are facing (if any) from stable features provided by Apache Phoenix 4.x. Your opinions are most welcome and would really help the community determine the direction of the project and release management.
On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 12:28 PM, Viraj Jasani <vjas...@apache.org> wrote: > I agree, EOL schedule is more important as we prepare to move to Phoenix 5. > We are going to initiate official discussion for the upcoming big features > e.g dual cluster support and where it fits well (as discussed over slack by > Daniel). > > As far as 4.16 is concerned, IMHO we should prefer retiring it sooner than > 4.x. Unless critical bugs are discovered, 4.16.1 could be the last release > in 4.16 release line. Hopefully, we will have better answers in coming days. > > > On Wed, 19 May 2021 at 11:52 AM, Istvan Toth <st...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> I am looking forward to less backports, and I want to use Java 8 features >> freely as much as the next developer. >> >> However, I'm going to play the devil's advocate here, and spell out what >> Ankit hinted at: >> >> We know that SFDC is the main contributor, and probably also the single >> largest user of Phoenix, and that they still use 4.x in production. >> Dropping 4.x and causing SFDC to maintain their production branch >> internally may not be in the best interest of the Apache project, >> as it may divert SFDC resources from the public branches, and may result >> in >> delaying or even missing fixes there. >> >> I think that it would be useful to know what EOL schedule would work best >> for SFDC, and align our plans with that. >> >> Perhaps Lars or someone else from SFDC could share their "official" >> opinion, and help set an EOL schedule that works for everyone. >> >> Istvan >> >> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 11:30 PM Ankit Singhal <ankitsingha...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > +1 for EOL'ing 4.x branches. >> > >> > As Josh and I, share the feedback from the same set of users, >> > it would still be a good idea to hear from others but as it's been >> already >> > been 12 days since your first mail out, just a notice can be given for >> > 72hrs(?) >> > before dropping the next 4.x versions from JIRA and cleaning branches in >> > case any volunteer comes up to maintain these branches. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 9:27 PM Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >> > > No objections over here! Y'all already know the work Istvan and >> Richard >> > > have been doing to push on Phoenix 5.1. That continues to be our >> focus. >> > > >> > > On 5/7/21 11:13 AM, Viraj Jasani wrote: >> > > > Hi, >> > > > >> > > > Based on HBase community's decision to EOL branch-1 after 1.7.0 >> release >> > > as >> > > > per the discussion thread [1], it is inevitable that we will also >> have >> > to >> > > > consider EOL of 4.x release line sometime soon. >> > > > >> > > > As we have discussed in the past, even though Phoenix 4.x should >> > support >> > > > Java 7 only (as it supports HBase 1), we are not strictly following >> > this >> > > > compatibility. With HBase 2 / Phoenix 5, we no longer have to worry >> > about >> > > > this source compatibility. Tephra also continues to support HBase 1 >> and >> > > > hence should follow Java 7 source compatibility rules and yet I see >> > many >> > > > Java 8 Optional imports in tephra-hbase-compat-2.x modules. Source >> > > > compatibility is just one of the reasons behind HBase community's >> > > decision >> > > > to EOL branch-1, many other important reasons are discussed over >> thread >> > > [1]. >> > > > Overall, HBase 2 is already widely adopted and deployed in >> production >> > and >> > > > so should be Phoenix 5 IMHO. >> > > > >> > > > Given that there are no apparent functional differences b/ 4.16 and >> > > 5.1(and >> > > > master) except for maybe few pending forward-ports (if any), I >> believe >> > it >> > > > is worth considering the ongoing 4.16 patch release as the last one >> on >> > > 4.x >> > > > release line and EOL 4.16 and 4.x. >> > > > Thoughts? >> > > > >> > > > 1. https://s.apache.org/rs2bk >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >
