What I'm trying to propose is that we either... a.) Pick the latest responsible (preserves our desired timeline for GA) date to cut a 5.0 branch, and not let anything else in after, including CEP-15/CEP-21. b.) Cut a 5.0 branch when the major release-defining element (maybe CEP-21?) merges to trunk, with the shared understanding (possibly what we're disagreeing about) that very little of what we need to test/de-risk is going to be inhibited by not cutting that branch earlier (and that certain testing efforts would be almost wholesale wasted if done beforehand).
i.e. Have one freeze/branch point. Pick a date and don't make exceptions, or pick the feature and *potentially* adjust the date. On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 2:07 PM Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: > So to bring us back to the goals and alignment here: > > With the following intentions: > - moving towards the goal of annual releases, with a cadence 12±3 months > apart, > - the branch to GA period being 2-3 months, > - avoiding any type of freeze on trunk, > - getting a release out by December's Summit, > - freeing up folk to start QA (that makes sense to start) immediately > > So what I *think* falls out logically: > > 1. We branch cassandra-5.0 on August 1st > 2. We expect an 8-12 week validation cycle which means GA Oct1-Nov1. > 3a. If we allow merge of CEP-15 / CEP-21 after branch, we risk > invalidating stabilization and risk our 2023 GA date > 3b. If we don't allow merge of CEP-15 / CEP-21 after branch, we risk > needing a fast-follow release and don't have functional precedent for the > snapshots we earlier agreed upon doing. > > Does that distill it and match everyone else's understanding? > > On Mon, Apr 17, 2023, at 2:20 PM, Mick Semb Wever wrote: > > > > On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 at 19:31, Caleb Rackliffe <calebrackli...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > ...or just cutting a 5.0 branch when CEP-21 is ready. > > There's nothing stopping us from testing JDK17 and TTL bits in trunk > before that. > > On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 11:25 AM Caleb Rackliffe <calebrackli...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Once all CEPs except CEP-21 and CEP-15 land we branch cassandra-5.0 > > For the record, I'm not convinced this is necessarily better than just > cutting a cassandra-5.0 branch on 1 October. > > > > How else would this work without being akin to a feature freeze on trunk. > > We want (need) as much time as possible to test. We have no evidence that > it will be quicker than 4.1, we have to create that evidence. Those folk > that free up and are ready to get ahead and de-risk our testing efforts > should be given a release branch to make their work easier and to give us > that evidence in a more controlled manner so that we can plan better next > time. Appreciate that there's one too many variables here, but I'm sticking > up for the testing efforts here. > > >
