+1 for 0.9

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:20 AM, Stevo Slavić <ssla...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 (non-binding) for 0.9
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:41 AM, Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io> wrote:
>
> > +1 for 0.9.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jun
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 (non-binding) for 0.9.
> > >
> > > Ismael
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Gwen Shapira <g...@confluent.io>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Kafka Fans,
> > > >
> > > > What do you think of making the next release (the one with security,
> > new
> > > > consumer, quotas, etc) a 0.9.0 instead of 0.8.3?
> > > >
> > > > It has lots of new features, and new consumer was pretty much scoped
> > for
> > > > 0.9.0, so it matches our original roadmap. I feel that so many
> awesome
> > > > features deserve a better release number.
> > > >
> > > > The downside is mainly some confusion (we refer to 0.8.3 in bunch of
> > > > places), and noisy emails from JIRA while we change "fix version"
> field
> > > > everywhere.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > >
> > >
> >
>



-- 
Grant Henke
Software Engineer | Cloudera
gr...@cloudera.com | twitter.com/gchenke | linkedin.com/in/granthenke

Reply via email to