Well the other problem I see is that this could create a lot of confusion for
our users, if more versions start popping up (and/or versions are skipped).
It's hard to row back from unwanted versions in the wild, and we may end up
having to either support them or disappoint our users.
Do we have any examples of this approach being used elsewhere?
It just seems to me if the goal is to make more manageable downstream updates,
a quarterly (or monthly) snapshot of latest might suffice, which can be done
without potentially messing with our release cycle? Perhaps I'm missing
something though.
On 03/05/2021, 09:44, "Mick Semb Wever" <m...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hmm, ok. I see some possible issues with this. You mention one
possibility, i.e. that downstream may end up releasing these versions for us?
Which potentially complicates our lives, whether we want it or not.
>
> Would this apply to only trunk, or to all existing major/minor releases?
Only trunk, only in the annual dev cycle.
Yeah, I can see different problems popping up, and alternative approaches.
I'm thinking let's try this to begin with, focusing on making it
easier to bump the version for our own sake (there's too much that's
hard-coded) and better documenting everything (all that's mentioned in
this thread). Off that, and seeing what happens in the ecosystem (and
what they ask for), we can evolve. Sound ok?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
