I have not followed the branch-2.11 work closely, but I think it makes sense to re-create branch-2.11 from the current master.
We created branch-2.11 almost 3 months ago. Re-creating the branch will prevent unnecessary delay on new features added over the past 3 months. If we follow through with this proposal, we will need to clean up PR tags and milestones to prevent confusion. Thanks, Michael On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 3:31 AM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello Pulsar fellows, > > I think that too much time passed since we wanted to cut 2.11. > > The branch-2.11 contains some code used by no one. > > In the meantime many features went into master branch, > > I don't think that it is worth it to cut a release from branch-2.11 > and start with something that is already stale. > > I propose to drop branch-2.11 and create a new branch out of the > current master branch and start the period of hardening before cutting > the release. > > IIUC we are waiting for this BookKeeper issue to be confirmed or fixed > or closed as "not a problem": > https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/3466 > I am personally working on that case together with the folks you > created the issue. > Honestly I have never been able to reproduce the problem with Pulsar. > I believe that it will take at least another week before having more > results about the investigations I am doing on BK. The problem is > reproducible only on a long-running test (more than 4 hours) of a > third party project and only in some private QA environment. > > Thoughts ? > > Enrico
