Hi All, Posting here for visibility: https://lists.apache.org/thread/0z30f3cfvm41hxlbxgp4fqdpv7mfgnv8
I opened that discussion thread about the new Spark Client plugin. My concern is that the linked PR looks like it may require changing out approach to how we publish Maven artifacts for that client.... Therefore, I'd like to have some more clarity on that issue in order to prevent suddenly changing Maven coordinates right after the 1.0 release. Let's use the other thread for technical discussions. This message is only to flag potential 1.0 impact. Thanks, Dmitri. On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 6:13 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote: > The rename commits( > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/commit/ab228afa4d975faabb7aaf1e8abb0804f5b9d353 > and > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/commit/fccc51ab111b7ee1a0d3c8898e94b0c54bc73d80 > ) > have been cherry-picked to 1.0 branch. > > Yufei > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:51 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > We could re-branch, but folks mentioned there are a few Python > > commits(like https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1810) we are not > > comfortable with having them in 1.0 branch. > > > > Feel free to bring up a discussion for more PRs you think it's 1.0 > > blockers and needed in 1.0. > > > > Yufei > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:42 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Yufei, > >> > >> As discussed before, I think it is preferable to do the renames in / > >> before > >> 1.0 because module names affect published Maven artifact names. > >> > >> For that matter, why not re-branch release/1.0.x from `main`? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Dmitri. > >> > >> On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 5:37 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi JB and Dmitri, do we need > >> https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/1695 > >> > in > >> > 1.0? We used to agree on bringing it to 1.0 if it's ready, but I'm OK > >> with > >> > either way. > >> > > >> > Yufei > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:31 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1616 was resolved by > #1830, > >> > > #1834 and #1839. And these three commits are cherry-picked to 1.0 > >> branch > >> > > already. > >> > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1881 was just resolved by > >> > #1889, > >> > > which has been cherry-picked to 1.0 branch. > >> > > > >> > > Yufei > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 12:02 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov < > >> di...@apache.org> > >> > > wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> Hi Yufei, et al. > >> > >> > >> > >> It looks like only two 1.0 blockers remain: > >> > >> > >> > >> [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1616 > >> > >> [2] https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1881 > >> > >> > >> > >> Re: [1] is anybody actively working on it? > >> > >> > >> > >> Also, I believe a lot of relevant changes got merged recently... > WDYT > >> > >> about > >> > >> re-branching `release/1.0.x` from `main` after addressing the > >> remaining > >> > >> issues? > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Dmitri. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 5:39 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > Hi folks, > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Many users have been asking about the Polaris release, and I > >> believe > >> > >> it's > >> > >> > critical to have a formal, production-ready 1.0 release ASAP. > >> Thanks > >> > to > >> > >> the > >> > >> > community’s hard work, we’re very close with a few remaining > >> blockers > >> > we > >> > >> > need to resolve. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > To keep things moving, I scheduled a community meeting for the > 1.0 > >> > >> release > >> > >> > next Monday at 9 AM PST. At the same time, sharing all issues > >> marked > >> > >> with > >> > >> > 1.0 blocker. We could resolve them here if possible. Feel free to > >> > chime > >> > >> in, > >> > >> > remove the blocker tag if you think it's not a blocker, or pick > any > >> > up. > >> > >> > Thanks a lot in advance! > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Here is the list: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > - Add CI for Python code ( > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/1058>#1058), > >> > >> > - Polaris persistence concurrency issues (#777) > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/777> > >> > >> > - Task handling is incomplete (#774) > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/774> > >> > >> > - Generated files in regtests/client/python/polaris (#755) > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/755> > >> > >> > - Resources not properly closed, resource & memory leaks > >> (#563) > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/563> > >> > >> > - Make Polaris safe against certain unparseable locations > >> (#552) > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/552> > >> > >> > - [BUG] Assumption that cache eviction does not happen > (#544) > >> > >> > <https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/544> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > To make it more interactive, you can also comment on the google > >> > >> > spreadsheet here: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GyLvp2cdYwioOsBwszNWiphZt_IIdo4LIfsZBFV88mc/edit?usp=sharing > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Yufei > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
