Hi Robert Yes, 1 has to be sorted out before the release. Do we have an issue about that (beyond the thread discussion) ? I already mentioned my "concern" about the shadow jar in Spark client. It's important but it can be improved later. The Maven coordinates are more problematic (if we change later). So, let's focus and address the Maven coordinates first.
For 2, I think it's not a blocker now, it has to be fixed when the release will be "published". Thanks ! Regards JB On Mon, Jun 23, 2025 at 1:40 PM Robert Stupp <sn...@snazy.de> wrote: > > Not "labeled" as blockers, but two things to clarify: > > 1. The "[DISCUSS[ Spark Client jars: maven coordinates and shading" thread > > 2. Having the docs for a release appear in a URL containing "in-dev" > doesn't feel right. > > > The first one might have implications to the release? > > > On 23.06.25 13:30, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > Hi folks, > > > > I don't see any Issue or PR with the 1.0-blocker label. > > > > I guess we are ready to cut 1.0.0 right ? > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 8:12 PM Yufei Gu <flyrain...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> +1 on documenting on the site, which I don't think it's a 1.0 blocker. It's > >> been added into the release notes[1]. > >> > >> [1]. > >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JDVdQraoEhOIv7agy7WzIuBQdW0_16jW-DBrnanuW7A/edit?tab=t.0 > >> > >> Yufei > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 11:08 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Thanks for the heads up, Prashant! > >>> > >>> I agree that it was a good idea to pull Compaction Rollback into 1.0. > >>> > >>> Do we want to document this feature, or just mention it in release notes? > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Dmitri. > >>> > >>> On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 1:17 PM Prashant Singh > >>> <prashant.si...@snowflake.com.invalid> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hey folks, > >>>> I want to thank the whole community for jumping in for the reviews of > >>>> Rollback Compaction on conflicts feature here > >>>> < > >>>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/polaris/commit/793cf086f1f784c36296b1ea75298a08ce608ef2 > >>>> . > >>>> I am happy to share that it has now merged, since the 1.0 boat has not > >>>> sailed, I cherry-picked the feature to 1.0, it's a clean cherry-pick ! > >>>> I believe it will strongly help in Apache Polaris adoption, and > >>>> sincerely thank everyone who participated ! > >>>> > >>>> Best, > >>>> Prashant Singh > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 9:13 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <di...@apache.org> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> 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 > >>>>>>>>>>>>
