Hi,

I think one additional issue to add to the pile is CASSANDRA-7544 "Allow
storage port to be configurable per node"

I think no matter what we land on implementation wise it will only
possible to make this change in a major release as it will means change
to the system schema as well as internode messaging protocol. 

Having this properly done and reviewed by January is optimistic. I think
it wouldn't slip past February/March.

Ariel

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016, at 11:34 PM, Nate McCall wrote:
> Agreed. As long as we have a goal I don't see why we have to adhere to
> arbitrary date for 4.0.
> 
> On Nov 16, 2016 1:45 PM, "Aleksey Yeschenko" <alek...@datastax.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > I’ll comment on the broader issue, but right now I want to elaborate on
> > 3.11/January/arbitrary cutoff date.
> >
> > Doesn’t matter what the original plan was. We should continue with 3.X
> > until all the 4.0 blockers have been
> > committed - and there are quite a few of them remaining yet.
> >
> > So given all the holidays, and the tickets remaining, I’ll personally be
> > surprised if 4.0 comes out before
> > February/March and 3.13/3.14. Nor do I think it’s an issue.
> >
> > —
> > AY
> >
> > On 16 November 2016 at 00:39:03, Mick Semb Wever (m...@thelastpickle.com)
> > wrote:
> >
> > On 4 November 2016 at 13:47, Nate McCall <zznat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Specifically, this should be "new stuff that could/will break things"
> > > given we are upping
> > > the major version.
> > >
> >
> >
> > How does this co-ordinate with the tick-tock versioning¹ leading up to the
> > 4.0 release?
> >
> > To just stop tick-tock and then say yeehaa let's jam in all the breaking
> > changes we really want seems to be throwing away some of the learnt wisdom,
> > and not doing a very sane transition from tick-tock to
> > features/testing/stable². I really hope all this is done in a way that
> > continues us down the path towards a stable-master.
> >
> > For example, are we fixing the release of 4.0 to November? or continuing
> > tick-tocks until we complete the 4.0 roadmap? or starting the
> > features/testing/stable branching approach with 3.11?
> >
> >
> > Background:
> > ¹) Sylvain wrote in an earlier thread titled "A Home for 4.0"
> >
> > > And as 4.0 was initially supposed to come after 3.11, which is coming,
> > it's probably time to have a home for those tickets.
> >
> > ²) The new versioning scheme slated for 4.0, per the "Proposal - 3.5.1"
> > thread
> >
> > > three branch plan with “features”, “testing”, and “stable” starting with
> > 4.0?
> >
> >
> > Mick
> >

Reply via email to