Jonathan's is a pretty compelling perspective. -- Michael
On 09/23/2016 07:04 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: > Both are effectively 3.9 on steroids. One month of features and > improvements with 2 months of bug fixes on top. > > If anything, this overdelivers. > > -- AY > > On 23 September 2016 at 17:02:05, Jonathan Haddad (j...@jonhaddad.com) > wrote: > > (non-binding) -1 on releasing 2 versions with the same version > number. Everything that's been communicated to the world has been > that there would be a feature release, then a bug fix release a month > later. This breaks that promise. > > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 4:23 PM Michael Shuler > <mich...@pbandjelly.org> wrote: > >> Thanks! I'll do these release builds and start votes, first thing >> Monday morning, unless I find some time on Sunday. >> >> -- Michael >> >> On 09/23/2016 05:15 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: >>> Branch 3.8 off 3.9 with a commit that only changes the version in >>> all >> appropriate places. >>> >>> Two separate votes works. >>> >>> -- AY >>> >>> On 23 September 2016 at 12:36:54, Michael Shuler >>> (mich...@pbandjelly.org) >> wrote: >>> >>> The cassandra-3.9 branch HEAD, commit bb371ea, looks good to >>> release (which will also be released as 3.8, changing just the >>> version number). I'm re-running a couple jobs right now, but >>> overall, I think we hit the goal of a clean board: >>> http://cassci.datastax.com/view/cassandra-3.9/ >>> >>> If there are no objections, I'd like to roll up 3.9/3.8 and get >>> them out the door. Should this be on one vote, since they are >>> really the same, or do 2 votes? I'm actually not entirely sure >>> how the build for 3.8 will work, since the branch was deleted. >>> Should I create new branch again for 3.8 with the version edit? >>> This sounds the most reasonable and workable with the release >>> build process. This actually does sound like it should be 2 >>> votes, since the commit sha will be different.. Thanks! >>> >>> -- Kind regards, Michael >>> >> >> >
