Hi all, I understand the merged PR is a feature, but it's something we had planned and requested for a long time. In fact, at Hive connector side, we have done a lot of work (supporting hive udf). Without this PR, all those work would be wasted and Hive feature itself in 1.9 would also be close to being useless.
I also agree that feature freeze means something and has its importance. On the other hand, I don't see eye to eye on how and when we had decided a feature freeze should be in place. To me, our feature freeze seems to be time based. That is, we determine a time by which feature freeze will happen, irregardless original feature plan. As a result, this practice incurs a great deal of randomness, leaving many planned feature half baked. The question is really about how we balance releasing something in time vs releasing something usable. This might be a great chance for us to meditate on this topic. The PR in question is requested by me, and its importance to Hive connector makes me stand by my request. On the other hand, if the PR has anything to improve, I'm all for it. Thanks, Xuefu On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 2:59 AM Timo Walther <twal...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Kurt, > > I posted my opinion around this particular example in FLINK-13225. > > Regarding the definition of "feature freeze": I think it is good to > write down more of the implicit processes that we had in the past. The > bylaws, coding guidelines, and a better FLIP process are very good steps > towards the right direction. However, not everything can be written down > and formulized. We should also remind ourselves of basic software > engineering principles. Merging a feature shortly before the actual > release is always dangerous. A feature needs time to settle down and be > tested for side-effects etc. Merging a feature with a lot of spaghetti > code, reflection magic, and a single IT case is not a complete feature > that is worth merging. > > I hope we can improve here for the next release. Thanks for the open > discussion. > > Regards, > Timo > > > Am 08.08.19 um 11:11 schrieb Kurt Young: > > Hi Stephan, > > > > Thanks for bringing this up. I think it's important and a good time to > > discuss what > > does *feature freeze* really means. At least to me, seems I have some > > misunderstandings with this comparing to other community members. But as > > you > > pointed out in the jira and also in this mail, I think your understanding > > makes sense > > to me. > > > > Maybe we can have a conclusion in the thread and put this into the > project > > bylaws > > which are under discussion? > > > > Regarding to FLINK-13225, I would like to hear other's opinion since I > > merged it. But > > I would like to revert it if someone voted for reverting it. > > > > Sorry for the inconvenience I caused. > > > > Best, > > Kurt > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 4:46 PM Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> Hi all! > >> > >> I would like to bring this topic up, because we saw quite a few "secret" > >> post-feature-freeze feature merges. > >> The latest example was > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-13225 > >> > >> I would like to make sure that we are all on the same page on what a > >> feature freeze means and how to handle possible additions after the > feature > >> freeze. > >> My understanding was the following, and I assume that this was also the > >> understanding of the community when we started establishing the release > >> practice: > >> > >> - Feature freeze is the date until new features can be merged. > >> - After the feature freeze, we only merge bug fixes, release relevant > >> tests (end to end tests), and documentation. > >> - Features should already be stable and have tests. It is not okay to > >> "get a foot in the door" before feature freeze by merging something > that is > >> not ready (as a placeholder) and then fixing it post feature freeze. > >> - Extending functionality to new components is not a bug fix, it is a > >> feature. > >> - If someone wants to add a minor feature after the feature freeze, > and > >> there is a good reason for that, it should be explicitly discussed. If > >> there is no objection, it can be merged. > >> > >> Please let me know if you have a different understanding of what feature > >> freeze means. > >> > >> Regarding the issue of FLINK-13225 > >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-13225>? > >> - Should we keep it? > >> - Should we revert it in the release-1.9 branch and only keep it for > >> master? > >> > >> Best, > >> Stephan > >> > > -- Xuefu Zhang "In Honey We Trust!"
