Hi Folks, There is nothing wrong with releasing system by it's modules, one-by-one. Also it is perfectly OK to have each module in a separate git repo. Each of these module release-candidate is voted separately. At the foundation level, release cycle of the project/modules is not defined, it is up to the community to decide. It is just general common sense: often releases are preferred.
The only one rule, community should vote on release with 3 +1 votes from the PMC members. And there can be the only issue if module release would stall without required number of binding votes. Sincerely, Dmitriy Pavlov ср, 22 апр. 2020 г. в 15:03, Igor Sapego <isap...@apache.org>: > Pavel, > > 1. We can conduct separate votes for every client, do you see any issues > here? > 2. This is true, but we have backward compatibility in our protocol, so > everything > should work just fine. > > Best Regards, > Igor > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 9:22 PM Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > -1 > > > > - Ignite is a single Apache project, it follows Apache release > guidelines, > > with voting and so on. Not sure how are we going to follow that with a > > separate repo. > > - Thin client features are often tied to server-side changes > > > > > What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? > > Those reuse some code with thick counterparts - same way as Java thin > does. > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 4:22 PM Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > What about dotnet and cpp thin clients? > > > > > > > 21 апр. 2020 г., в 16:19, Dmitriy Pavlov <dpav...@apache.org> > > > написал(а): > > > > > > > > +1 since > > > > - Simpler release may allow us to release more often > > > > - Often releases - users will get updates faster, more chances to > grow > > > and > > > > keep our user base > > > > - Faster updates and easy to get next update may have positive effect > > on > > > > community growth. Since newcomer may want to fix a bug and later use > > > result > > > > in his/her production environment. > > > > > > > > вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 13:27, Alexey Zinoviev <zaleslaw....@gmail.com > >: > > > > > > > >> Agree with these non-JVM languages. > > > >> Especially for Python:) > > > >> > > > >> вт, 21 апр. 2020 г. в 12:58, Igor Sapego <isap...@apache.org>: > > > >> > > > >>> Guys, > > > >>> > > > >>> It was discussed on the dev list a few times that it would be a > good > > > >>> idea to move Python, Node.js and PHP thin clients to separate repos > > > >>> and separate release cycles. > > > >>> > > > >>> In short there are several arguments for that: > > > >>> > > > >>> 1. There are no dependencies on the core functionality so there is > > > simply > > > >>> no need for them to be in the main repo. > > > >>> > > > >>> 2. Those thin clients often do not get updates from release to > > release, > > > >> but > > > >>> still > > > >>> we "release" them, as they are a part of the main release. > > > >>> > > > >>> 3. Moving them to a separate release cycle will allow us to release > > > some > > > >>> hot > > > >>> fixes for those clients faster and easier. > > > >>> > > > >>> 4. Composer needs a PHP packet that is released to be in a separate > > > >>> repository. > > > >>> > > > >>> Thoughts? > > > >>> > > > >>> Best Regards, > > > >>> Igor > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
