While I still don't agree with the check being part of the verification
script (there are 300+ flagged artifacts, including some of which that are
bytecode - what is anyone supposed to check in that??), I think I am seeing
something different from the known Quarkus-generated bytecode.

I took the `polaris-rustfs-container` module - which to my understanding
(verified with the generated module file) should not depend on Quarkus. All
artifacts generated for this module were still flagged as different. Here
is a link to the diffchecker for the module file:
https://www.diffchecker.com/s7ARiZOh/

Are we sure what we are looking at is still due to Quarkus/Jandex/known
dependencies with non-deterministic bytecode?

-Adnan

On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 9:58 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]> wrote:

> > Quarkus-generated bytecode is currently expected to cause a bit-by-bit
> verification failure.
>
> Given this, the full "bit-by-bit" reproducibility verification isn't
> practical. Can we exclude the Quarkus generated bytecode in the script?
>
>
> Yufei
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 7:12 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I think it's fair to keep it but to clearly state to the user that it's
> > "expected" (I don't say normal :)).
> >
> > I think Adnan was confused when he saw the warnings.
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 2:47 PM Robert Stupp <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The verification script was built with full "bit-by-bit"
> reproducibility
> > in
> > > mind.
> > > The verification failure here is technically correct, Quarkus-generated
> > > bytecode is currently expected to cause a bit-by-bit verification
> > failure.
> > >
> > > What it's basically saying is: "I cannot verify that the artifacts
> fully
> > > match the result as expected from the source tree."
> > > It's annoying, but, in my very personal opinion, it's correct and
> should
> > > stay. Hence the paragraph about the Quarkus generated jars in the
> failure
> > > message.
> > > One may also interpret this as: "I should look, at least, into the
> > zip/tar
> > > files and validate that only the Quarkus generated bytecode is causing
> > the
> > > difference - and nothing else, for example, a dependency jar.""
> > >
> > > Robert
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 12:42 PM Adnan Hemani via dev <
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Robert and/or Pierre, can one of you confirm this? If so, I can open
> a
> > PR
> > > > tomorrow removing these checks from the script. We can add it back in
> > the
> > > > future once Quarkus reproducible builds are in a version that Polaris
> > > runs
> > > > on.
> > > >
> > > > -Adnan
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 3:36 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> [email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I agree. I think it was anticipated steps.
> > > > >
> > > > > Le mar. 31 mars 2026 à 12:27, Adnan Hemani via dev <
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > >> If all artifacts fail due to these reasons, then why did we ever
> > > insert
> > > > >> these checks into the script? IMO there is no point in creating
> all
> > > this
> > > > >> noise in the script output if we should not ever expect it to
> > succeed.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Adnan
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 12:32 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > By the way, as tracking in issue #2204, it's expected the
> > > > >> > verify-release.sh script warns about differences between local
> > build
> > > > and
> > > > >> > files on dist/maven staging repo.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > The reason is:
> > > > >> >   - Quarkus-generated bytecode (generated-bytecode.jar,
> > > > >> > transformed-bytecode.jar, quarkus-application.jar) is
> > > > non-deterministic
> > > > >> >   - Re-assembled jars (polaris-admin-*.jar,
> polaris-server-*.jar)
> > > > >> contain
> > > > >> > the above
> > > > >> >   - Zips/tarballs containing any of the above inherit the
> > > > >> > non-reproducibility
> > > > >> > Until Quarkus fully supports reproducible builds, these
> > differences
> > > > are
> > > > >> > expected and should be reviewed manually rather than treated as
> > > > release
> > > > >> > blockers.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > So, maybe we should have a "clear/emphasized" message on the
> > > > >> > verify-release.sh script about "reproducible build known issue".
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Regards
> > > > >> > JB
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 6:37 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > [email protected]
> > > > >
> > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> I created https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/4092 to
> update
> > > the
> > > > >> >> verify-release.sh script, checking if LICENSE/NOTICE exists in
> > > either
> > > > >> root
> > > > >> >> or META-INF.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Regards
> > > > >> >> JB
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> On Tue, Mar 31, 2026 at 6:16 AM Yufei Gu <[email protected]
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>> Thanks for the confirmation, JB, that aligns with my
> > > understanding.
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> Let me briefly summarize the issue raised in the thread:
> > > > >> >>>
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/bv2bdv4d2yhslnmj9bthsthfsd35b0of
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> Adnan noted that the verify-release script reports missing
> > LICENSE
> > > > and
> > > > >> >>> NOTICE files under META-INF/ for the Spark connector JARs,
> which
> > > > were
> > > > >> >>> removed in PR 3912.
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> My understanding is that these files are not required in
> > > META-INF/,
> > > > as
> > > > >> >>> the top-level LICENSE and NOTICE files should be sufficient. I
> > > also
> > > > >> >>> double-checked previous releases: versions 1.0.0, 1.0.1,
> 1.1.0,
> > > and
> > > > >> 1.2.0
> > > > >> >>> do not include them under META-INF/, while only 1.3.0 does.
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> Given this, I suggest either ignoring this warning from the
> > > > >> >>> verify-release script or updating the script accordingly.
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> Yufei
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 8:59 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>> Hi
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> An update about 1.4.0 release:
> > > > >> >>>> - LICENSE/NOTICE have been fixed on the Spark plugin
> > > > >> >>>> - We have a plan about the CLI for the 1.4.0 release
> > > > >> >>>> - I checked Spark plugin build and it looks compliant with
> > > > >> reproducible
> > > > >> >>>> build to me (since ShadowJar extends AbstractArchiveTask, the
> > > > >> >>>> createPolarisSparkJar bundle JAR also inherits these settings
> > > > >> >>>> automatically, meaning both the regular JAR and the
> > shadow/bundle
> > > > JAR
> > > > >> >>>> should be reproducible).
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> I think we are good to go with the release.
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> Anything missing for the 1.4.0 release ?
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> Regards
> > > > >> >>>> JB
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 8:02 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > >> [email protected]>
> > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> Hi Yufei,
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> I agree; that is a good plan for the CLI.
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> We will update the release script and process regarding the
> > CLI
> > > > for
> > > > >> >>>>> the 1.5.0 release.
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> Regards,
> > > > >> >>>>> JB
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 7:05 PM Yufei Gu <
> > [email protected]>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> For CLI publishing, we set up this pypi repo last year:
> > > > >> >>>>>> https://pypi.org/manage/project/apache-polaris/releases/.
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> We need to publish to this repo once the 1.4.0 vote passed.
> > > Users
> > > > >> can
> > > > >> >>>>>> pull it directly from PyPI after that.
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> Yufei
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> On Sun, Mar 8, 2026 at 10:02 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > >> [email protected]>
> > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> Hi,
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> I will work with Robert on #3909. I will do another pass
> to
> > > have
> > > > >> it
> > > > >> >>>>>>> merge
> > > > >> >>>>>>> asap.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> PR #3891 looks good to me and can be merged imho.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> Following PR #3881 (fixing LICENSE/NOTICE in both admin
> and
> > > > server
> > > > >> >>>>>>> distributions), we have to update the "main" distribution
> > > > >> (basically
> > > > >> >>>>>>> merging both admin and server distributions
> LICENSE/NOTICE).
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> So, to summarize the blockers for 1.4.0:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> - PR #3891 is good and can be merged
> > > > >> >>>>>>> - PR #3909 needs another pass (I gonna do that)
> > > > >> >>>>>>> - LICENSE/NOTICE from the "main" distribution should be
> > > updated
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> Regards
> > > > >> >>>>>>> JB
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2026 at 9:54 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > >> [email protected]>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> > Hi
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> > I did the #3909 review and it's not "complete" (see
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3909#pullrequestreview-3891720251
> > > > >> >>>>>>> > for the one interested).
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> > I will work to fix that (either with Robert or creating
> a
> > > new
> > > > >> PR).
> > > > >> >>>>>>> > I will keep you posted :)
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> > Regards
> > > > >> >>>>>>> > JB
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> > On Wed, Mar 4, 2026 at 2:38 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
> > > > >> >>>>>>> [email protected]>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> > wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >> Hi
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >> I'm checking the LICENSE/NOTICE in the Spark plugin
> right
> > > now
> > > > >> >>>>>>> (#3909).
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >> I'm also doing a full pass to be sure we are good.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >> I will keep you posted.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >> Thanks !
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >> Regards
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >> JB
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2026 at 2:23 PM Adnan Hemani via dev <
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >> [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> Hi Robert,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> This is a good point. JB, can you please take a look
> at
> > > > these
> > > > >> >>>>>>> and merge
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> if
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> you think the PRs are complete?
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> Best,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> Adnan Hemani
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2026 at 11:16 PM Robert Stupp <
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > Hi all,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > Thanks for working with JB.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > The remaining legal issues on the 1.4.0 milestone
> [1]
> > > > should
> > > > >> >>>>>>> be sorted
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> out
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > before cutting the branch to avoid additional work
> and
> > > > >> further
> > > > >> >>>>>>> delay
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> from
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > duplicate PRs (against main and the release branch).
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > Neither the LICENSE/NOTICE for the binary
> > > > server+admin-tool
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> distribution
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > nor the LICENSE/NOTICE files for the plugin are
> good.
> > > PRs
> > > > to
> > > > >> >>>>>>> fix this
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> still
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > need reviews.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > Robert
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/milestone/6
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > On Wed, Mar 4, 2026 at 3:47 AM Adnan Hemani via dev
> <
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > [email protected]>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > Hi all,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > I've worked with JB to verify that we should be
> > ready
> > > to
> > > > >> cut
> > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> release
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > branch for 1.4.0. As we are well past the original
> > > > branch
> > > > >> >>>>>>> cut date, I
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > will
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > cut the branch sometime tomorrow, March 4th, 2026
> > > during
> > > > >> PST
> > > > >> >>>>>>> business
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > hours. If you have any last-minute changes that
> need
> > > to
> > > > go
> > > > >> >>>>>>> into the
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> 1.4.0
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > release, please ensure they are merged tonight.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > Best,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > Adnan Hemani
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 6:04 AM Jean-Baptiste
> > Onofré <
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> [email protected]>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > Hi
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > During the weekend, I reviewed the 1.4.0 release
> > > > prep. I
> > > > >> >>>>>>> also found
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > that
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > LICENSE and NOTICE are not up to date:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > - the versions are not up to date (I created a
> PR
> > to
> > > > >> >>>>>>> remove the
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > versions
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > (
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3861
> that
> > > has
> > > > >> been
> > > > >> >>>>>>> reused
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> by
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > Robert
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > in the "generation" PR).
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > - the runtime distributions dependencies
> changed,
> > > but
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> LICENSE/NOTICE
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > have
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > not been updated (I was about to create another
> PR
> > > > about
> > > > >> >>>>>>> that).
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > I mentioned that last week during the Polaris
> > > > Community
> > > > >> >>>>>>> Meeting:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> this
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > is
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > a
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > blocker for the 1.4.0 release.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > Thanks Robert for the PR, I will review it and
> > > double
> > > > >> >>>>>>> check if we
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> are
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > good
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > (from a legal standpoint).
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > Regards
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > JB
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 2:44 PM Robert Stupp <
> > > > >> >>>>>>> [email protected]>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > Hi all,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > I reviewed the licenses for the binary
> > > distribution,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> which is
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> part of
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > the release management.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > Several changes must be made to the LICENSE
> > files
> > > > and
> > > > >> >>>>>>> block the
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > release.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > Looking into those, it became apparent that
> > other
> > > > >> >>>>>>> dependency
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> changes
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > are
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > required for version 1.4.0 release.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > I have created the relevant PRs and added them
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > >> >>>>>>> milestone
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> for
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > the
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > 1.4.0 release.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > Robert
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 2:02 AM Adnan Hemani
> via
> > > > dev <
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > Thanks for this update - I had it on my
> > calendar
> > > > >> today
> > > > >> >>>>>>> to send
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> out
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > an
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > email
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > today to get this started and completely
> > missed
> > > > this
> > > > >> >>>>>>> thread in
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> my
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > inbox
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > for
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > some reason.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > Let me start the thread with my initial
> > thoughts
> > > > on
> > > > >> >>>>>>> all the
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > remaining
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > open
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > issues and PRs later today and we can go
> from
> > > > there.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > Best,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > Adnan Hemani
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 6:58 AM
> Jean-Baptiste
> > > > >> Onofré <
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > [email protected]>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > Hi folks,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > I believe we are approaching the scheduled
> > > time
> > > > >> for
> > > > >> >>>>>>> the next
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > release,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > following our monthly cadence.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > I just reviewed the GitHub milestone (
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > >
> > https://github.com/apache/polaris/milestone/6
> > > )
> > > > >> and
> > > > >> >>>>>>> noticed
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> there
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > are
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > still
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > 14 open issues. While some appear close to
> > > > >> >>>>>>> completion,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> others may
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > require
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > further discussion.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > Could we perform a triage to determine if
> > > these
> > > > >> >>>>>>> issues should
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > remain
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > in
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > the
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > 1.4.0 milestone or be bumped to a later
> one?
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > Adnan, as the release manager, would you
> > mind
> > > > >> taking
> > > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> lead on
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > the
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > 1.4.0-incubating release preparation?
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > JB
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2026 at 8:42 PM
> > Jean-Baptiste
> > > > >> Onofré
> > > > >> >>>>>>> <
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > > Hi folks
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > > I would like to start a discussion to
> > > prepare
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> 1.4.0-incubating.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > > Who would like to be release manager on
> > this
> > > > >> one ?
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > > I will check the milestone on GH. Please
> > > > assign
> > > > >> >>>>>>> the 1.4.0
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > milestone
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > to
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > > issues/PRs you want to include in this
> > > > release.
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > > Thanks !
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > > JB
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>> >
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> >>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to