+1 - starting this discussion - thanks Ed! On components, I agree with Greg that the PostgreSQL-style packaging model (suffix tied to DB major version, e.g. cloudberry_gpbackup_2-1.36) would give us clarity and flexibility. In the short term, though, aligning the upcoming gpbackup/pxf releases with the 2.x line seems simplest for users coming from Greenplum/CloudberryDB/Arenadata/other variations of GP-5/6/7.
Dianjin’s update on repo consolidation is important. It makes sense to target updated gpbackup* releases once that work wraps up (likely October), and PXF a bit later. On branching: I see value in a 3.0 cut from main sooner rather than later, but I also agree with Dianjin that a *2.1 release first* provides a smoother path for new users who are just starting with 2.0 and want to benefit from improvements in 2.1 without having to go thru a catalog change/major version upgrade. A pragmatic approach may be: ship 2.1 + components soon, then follow with 3.0 tagged from main when the timing feels right. And yes, PG16 catalog changes almost certainly justify a 4.0 bump... that gives us a clean roadmap. Thanks, Tushar -- Tushar Pednekar <https://linkedin.com/in/tusharpednekar/> Apache Cloudberry <https://cloudberry.apache.org> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 3:49 AM Dianjin Wang <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ed, > > Thanks for bringing up this discussion! > > > Best, > Dianjin Wang > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 5:49 PM Ed Espino <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > - Releasing the above components, and how to assign versions. > > I'd like to provide some updates on these components. Currently, > developers are working on updating the codebase to match the archived > GP versions, which include cloudberry-pxf and cloudberry-gpbackup. > > Additionally, there is a plan to consolidate and rename repositories > for cloudberry-gpbackup and cloudberry-gpbackup-s3-plugin[1]. > > Once this work is completed, would it be feasible to release updated > versions of these components? For the timeline, I guess the > cloudberry-gpbackup* may be completed in Oct., but cloudberry-pxf's > completion cannot be too sure. > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/9dm925lx464rh02fxvts2zfhdk7358ry > > > - Whether to cut a 3.x release from main sooner rather than later. > > I suggest postponing the 3.x release cut since the main branch has > already been marked as 3.0-devel due to recent PRs that introduced > catalog changes. > > Instead, how about we start preparing for the 2.1 release? I observed > that some community users have begun the journey of Cloudberry after > its 2.0 release, and I'm afraid that a newer major release might > distract their ongoing work in the short distance from 2.0. Need a > buffer for them to digest. > > Above are my inputs for the information. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
