On 8 June 2016 at 15:07, Ken Giusti <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robbie -
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Robbie Gemmell" <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 4:56:56 PM
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Qpid Dispatch Router 0.6.0 (RC4)
>>
>> Is the behaviour a regression, or has it always been that way? If its
>> the latter then I think its simply a good addition to a list of things
>> worthy of a swift followup release, rather than a reason to hold back
>> this one.
>>
>
> Good point - no it is not a regression.
>
> But it is an ambiguity in the behavior that is visible to the clients that 
> will likely result in clients violating the AMQP 1.0 spec (i.e. resending w/o 
> proper delivery count or resending to a node that cannot process the message).
>
> No I don't want to hold up the release.  I agree it's been too long since the 
> last release (but given the major refactor that has occurred it is 
> understandable why it has taken so long).  But I don't want to let this issue 
> remain open for too long once a fix is available.
>
> I haven't found any other issues with the RC4 candidate.
>
> If the consensus is to ship 0.6.0 without a fix I'll rescind my -1 but I'm 
> going to call for a 0.6.x release if 0.7.0 doesn't ship within a couple of 
> weeks after a fix is made available.
>
> Is this a reasonable compromise?
>
> -K

Yes, I think doing a 0.6.1 (or however many 0.6.x as are appropriate
to resolve similar issues as they arise) if 0.7.0 is more than a
couple weeks away seems like a good approach. It almost seems like the
final digit in the versions could be useful :)

Robbie

>
>> There will be other things requiring fixes and as people discover
>> those we can and should do additional releases as appropriate to fix
>> them. It looks to be almost 9 months since the last Dispatch release,
>> its time to get a new one out and then do some more after that.
>>
>> I've said this before, but I think its worth repeating. In general we
>> are guilty of taking too long to put out releases, often coupled with
>> having putting too much in them, then putting even more things in to
>> avoid them waiting around for the next slow release. The trouble is,
>> the more often releases are delayed to fit in yet another thing, then
>> the more often people will feel the need to fit yet more into it, and
>> the longer people will put off testing the candidate builds due to
>> expectation there will still be more of them to come, and the later we
>> might find actual blockers as a result, and the further needless
>> respins there are. The net result is fewer releases that can often end
>> up being overly annoying and further encourage doing less of them.
>>
>> It takes us no more time and effort (probably even a good bit less) to
>> do multiple releases in a given reasonable time period than it does to
>> respin one over and over before release, but short of breaking API
>> changes to consider its generally going to be nicer having the
>> additional releases.
>>
>> Robbie
>>
>> On 7 June 2016 at 20:57, Ken Giusti <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > -1 - Don't release RC4 because of
>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DISPATCH-366
>> >
>> > Sorry to be the party pooper, but this seems serious enough to block the
>> > RC.
>> >
>> > If this isn't fixed we risk clients re-sending messages with the improper
>> > delivery-count value.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "Ted Ross" <[email protected]>
>> >> To: [email protected]
>> >> Sent: Monday, June 6, 2016 5:32:14 PM
>> >> Subject: [VOTE] Qpid Dispatch Router 0.6.0 (RC4)
>> >>
>> >> This is the vote thread to approve RC4 as the final Dispatch Router 0.6.0.
>> >>
>> >> Given that this is a significant release in terms of features and
>> >> functionality, I think we should get it released.
>> >>
>> >> I understand that there are a number of open issues with this candidate,
>> >> the most worrisome being DISPATCH-358.  This issue involves intermittent
>> >> crashes, but to this point it has been unreproducible outside of the
>> >> reporter's test environment.
>> >>
>> >> My proposal is to go forward with the release, get the new functionality
>> >> out officially, and continue to close out the issues that are
>> >> outstanding.  If we reproduce and fix DISPATCH-358, we can turn a 0.6.1
>> >> on the release branch, or wait for 0.7.0 (which should be much shorter
>> >> in duration than 0.6.0).
>> >>
>> >> Please weigh in with your opinion and your vote:
>> >>
>> >> +1 - Release RC4 as Qpid Dispatch Router 0.6.0
>> >> -1 - Don't release RC4 because of _____________
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> -Ted
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > --
>> > -K
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>>
>
> --
> -K
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to