This is a great idea, but like others I do have some additional questions about this:
1. Are we going to be producing artifacts from these branches? 2. How many branches are we planning on keeping? Is it one per branch we "officially" support? Best, - Francisco On 2025/10/06 16:03:38 Josh McKenzie wrote: > Many large‑scale Cassandra users have had to maintain private feature > back-port forks (e.g., CEP‑37, compaction optimization, etc) for years on > older branches. That duplication adds risk and pulls time away from upstream > contributions which came up as a pain point in discussion at CoC this year. > > The proposal we came up with: an official, community‑maintained backport > branch (e.g. cassandra‑5.1) built on the current GA release that we pilot for > a year and then decide if we want to make it official. The branch would > selectively accept non‑disruptive improvements that meet criteria we define > together. There’s a lot of OSS prior art here (Lucene, httpd, Hadoop, Kafka, > Linux kernel, etc). > > Benefits include reduced duplicated effort, a safer middle ground between > trunk and frozen GA releases, faster delivery of vetted features, and > community energy going to this branch instead of duplicated on private forks. > > If you’re interested in helping curate or maintain this branch - or have > thoughts on the idea - please reply and voice your thoughts. > > ~Josh
