My 2 cents.  When we added V5 to 3.x wasn’t it added as a beta protocol for 
tick/tock stuff and known that when a new version came out it would most 
possibly break the older releases V5 beta stuff? Or at the very least add new 
things to V5.  So I see no reason to need to add more new features to 3.11 v5.

-Jeremiah

> On Nov 7, 2017, at 9:41 AM, Oleksandr Petrov <oleksandr.pet...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> Currently, 3.11 supports V5 as a protocol version. However, all new
> features are now going to 4.0, which is going to be a new feature release.
> 
> Right now we have two v5 features:
> 
>   - CASSANDRA-10786 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10786>
>   - CASSANDRA-12838 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12838>
> 
> 
> #12838 is adding duration type, which is a nice addition. #10786 is also
> useful, but is more of an edge cases for users with huge clusters and/or
> frequent schema changes.
> 
> If we leave v5 in 3.11, we'll have to always backport all v5 features to
> 3.11. This is something that hasn't been done in #10786. So the question
> is: are we ready to commit and support v5 in 3.11 "forever", or should we
> stop until it went too far and remove v5 from 3.11 since it's still in beta
> there.
> 
> Looking forward to hear your opinion,
> 
> 
> -- 
> Alex Petrov


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org

Reply via email to