I consider removal of dead code and refactoring to be in the same category: critical to the longevity of the project, and not adding stability value to GA releases which is our only priority for them.
So improvement, and thus trunk / unreleased only. ~Josh On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 8:08 PM Ekaterina Dimitrova <e.dimitr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Personal opinion - I see removal of dead code as improvement which still > does not qualify for patch release. I am not afraid of breaking the tests > we have but of those we might be missing :-) > Of course, depends also on what and how much dead code we talk about > > Best regards, > Ekaterina > > On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 at 14:13, Stefan Miklosovic < > stefan.mikloso...@instaclustr.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> scripts for Windows support for Cassandra were dropped in 4.0.0 (as >> well as in beta4) as part of (1). The thing is that this work was not >> done fully because the code itself (Java sources) were not modified >> and they still contained a lot of Windows-specific logic. >> >> Hence, we are removing that in (2). However, and this is the core of >> the issue I am getting to, we are not sure if it should be removed in >> 4.0.2 too or it should be removed only in 4.1. >> >> The reason behind not removing it in 4.0.2 is that it might >> destabilise the codebase of 4.0.x. To add to it, 4.0.x releases (or >> any patch release for that matter) should only include fixes / >> critical patches, not new features. The question is - is removal of >> the dead code "bug" so it qualifies to be removed in a patch release >> or is it a new feature which should be "introduced" in 4.1 only? >> >> If we remove it in 4.1 only, there will be Windows-specific code which >> is not invokable, as we removed Windows startup scripts so folks >> wanting to run 4.0.0 on Windows would literally have to put these >> scripts back from pre-removal times. >> >> Regardless of this specific issue, I would like to know what the >> general consensus about the removal of some dead code in patch >> releases is. >> >> Thanks and regards >> >> (1) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16171 >> (2) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16956 >> >
