Hi Mickael, I agree +1 to proceeding with the 3.8 release on-time.
I'm fine with cutting the 3.9 branch immediately after the Kraft KIPS are feature-complete, or 4 months after the 3.8 release, whichever comes first. Thanks, Greg On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 1:29 PM Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > We follow a time based release process precisely to avoid this type of > issues. > Rushing to complete a feature and merging it just before the release > puts pressure on the contributors, and leaves little time to properly > test it. Especially on a complex feature like KIP-853. > > I'd be +1 on releasing 3.8 now and doing a 3.9 release to reach > feature parity. If we really want, as Sophie suggested, we could do a > shorter cycle for 3.9 before moving onto 4.0. > > Thanks, > Mickael > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 10:23 PM Christopher X Bogan > <ambitiousking...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > is this where I ask > > to join? > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 1:20 PM Greg Harris <greg.har...@aiven.io.invalid > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Sophie and Justine, > > > > > > I share your concerns about delaying 3.8 in order to give the Kraft > KIPs > > > more time for implementation. I raised them in the discussion for > KIP-1012 > > > [1]: > > > > > > > I think there is a > > > > risk that features that are on-time and eligible for a 3.8 release > > > > could be delayed by some KIPs which are given special treatment. > > > > > > This situation is exactly why Kafka has standardized on time based > releases > > > [2], and It is not exceptional for features to slip from releases in > order > > > to keep the releases on-time, it's a very intentional choice of > priorities. > > > > > > I don't think the situation we're in warrants parallel development, and > > > I'm uncomfortable with incurring the additional risk to users by doing > a > > > nonstandard release. > > > For example, two risks are that 3.9 never happens, or happens much > later > > > than expected (after 4.1, 4.2, etc). There is a remote chance of these > > > happening, but we should be prepared if these features get delayed > further. > > > Users could be left behind waiting for a 3.9 release without an upgrade > > > path for new features or security updates. I found this to be the most > > > compelling motivation for KIP-1012, and parallel development doesn't > > > address it. > > > If the 3.9 release comes out much later, users may be unsafe upgrading > from > > > 3.9 to some 4.x versions, and we would need special notices to explain > this > > > non-linearity in our versions. > > > > > > Thanks all, > > > Greg > > > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/kvdp2gmq5gd9txkvxh5vk3z2n55b04s5 > > > [2] > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Time+Based+Release+Plan > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 1:17 PM Josep Prat <josep.p...@aiven.io.invalid > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Justine, > > > > > > > > I know we discarded parallel branching, but it was under the scope of > > > 3.8.0 > > > > and with the KIPs no yet approved. > > > > We could also not do a parallel release, but rather "quick" 3.9 and > then > > > > start with 4.0. > > > > > > > > Best > > > > ----------------- > > > > Josep Prat > > > > Open Source Engineering Director, Aiven > > > > josep.p...@aiven.io | +491715557497 | aiven.io > > > > Aiven Deutschland GmbH > > > > Alexanderufer 3-7, 10117 Berlin > > > > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > > > > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024, 22:08 Josep Prat <josep.p...@aiven.io> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Sophie, > > > > > > > > > > I have a call tomorrow with José to clarify the estimates for > KIP-853. > > > > > I also wouldn't like to delay the release for a month or more. > > > > > > > > > > Regarding your proposal, I find it would be a good way forward, +1 > from > > > > my > > > > > side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I also find this release and what should include is a hot topic. > > > > > What do others think? > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > > > ---------------- > > > > > Josep Prat > > > > > Open Source Engineering Director, Aiven josep.p...@aiven.io | > > > > > +491715557497 | aiven.io > > > > > Aiven Deutschland GmbH > > > > > Alexanderufer 3-7, 10117 Berlin > > > > > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > > > > > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024, 21:23 Sophie Blee-Goldman < > sop...@responsive.dev > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Hey all -- was just wondering where we currently stand Re: > delaying 3. > > > > for > > > > >> the KRaft KIPs vs doing a 3.9 release > > > > >> > > > > >> I know we don't want to have to wait for a whole release cycle to > ship > > > > >> these KRaft features, but delaying 3.8 up to month is also rather > > > > >> difficult > > > > >> to swallow. I just wanted to throw an unusual idea out there and > see > > > if > > > > >> this might be a possible compromise, or is out of the question: > > > > >> > > > > >> What if we proceed with the 3.8 release as-is, without these > KIPs, but > > > > >> rather than doing 3.9 in another 3 months we continue on with the > plan > > > > to > > > > >> ship 4.0 in the fall and simply do a very small 3.9 release just > for > > > the > > > > >> KRaft KIPs once they are finished? > > > > >> > > > > >> I know this breaks our usual release cycle and may be confusing to > > > some > > > > >> users, but many of us are waiting on things being shipped in 3.8 > and > > > > >> delaying it by another month (perhaps more) feels unfair. At the > same > > > > >> time, > > > > >> I understand the need to ship these KRaft KIPs before 4.0 and that > > > there > > > > >> are others who would consider it unfair if the KRaft KIPs were > delayed > > > > >> until the next release cycle. So it seems like an easy win-win to > make > > > > >> everyone happy by shipping 3.8 now and shipping the KRaft KIPs > > > whenever > > > > >> they are ready. This also removes the pressure on these KIPs to > rush > > > > >> everything in or cut scope, and would give them some breathing > room to > > > > >> take > > > > >> the time they need. > > > > >> > > > > >> Thoughts? > > > > >> > > > > >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 11:44 PM Josep Prat > > > <josep.p...@aiven.io.invalid > > > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > Hi all, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > We are now past the code freeze for the 3.8.0 release. If you > think > > > a > > > > >> > commit should be backported to the 3.8 branch, please ping me > in the > > > > PR > > > > >> > (@jlprat). > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Thanks! > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 7:22 PM José Armando García Sancio > > > > >> > <jsan...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Hi Josep, > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > See my comment below. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 1:17 PM Josep Prat > > > > >> <josep.p...@aiven.io.invalid> > > > > >> > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > How long do you think it will take to bring KIP-853 to > > > completion? > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > We are still missing a few issues/jiras that need to get > > > implemented > > > > >> > > for the feature to be usable. I would say a few more weeks. > May be > > > > >> > > early July or mid July. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Thanks, > > > > >> > > -- > > > > >> > > -José > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > -- > > > > >> > [image: Aiven] <https://www.aiven.io> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > *Josep Prat* > > > > >> > Open Source Engineering Director, *Aiven* > > > > >> > josep.p...@aiven.io | +491715557497 > > > > >> > aiven.io <https://www.aiven.io> | < > > > > >> https://www.facebook.com/aivencloud > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/aiven/> < > > > > >> > https://twitter.com/aiven_io> > > > > >> > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH* > > > > >> > Alexanderufer 3-7, 10117 Berlin > > > > >> > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > > > > >> > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
