Re: moving the site from SVN to git
I see no good reason to trash history. There are tools to make moving from svn to git (hopefully) painless. We used git-svn for the main c* source to retain history of both, which this tool uses to do migrations - https://github.com/nirvdrum/svn2git Michael On 9/25/19 12:57 AM, Mick Semb Wever wrote: Personally, no, I don't. What I need to know is if someone who actually works on the site needs the history in *git*. Yes. I need the history in *git*. And I believe that INFRA can do the migration for you. (For example, INFRA-12055 and spark-website) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?
Can we put it on vote(if required) if no one has more comments? On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:44 PM Jonathan Koppenhofer wrote: > Nice work... I like this and have no additions/comments at this time > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 4:18 PM sankalp kohli > wrote: > > > We added and changed a lot of things to this doc during a discussion in > > NGCC. Can everyone take a look at it and provide feedback. > > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 10:51 PM Dinesh Joshi wrote: > > > > > I have left some comments on the document. Apart from a few > > clarifications > > > and some minor changes, I feel its in a good shape. I think we should > > move > > > forward with it. We can refine the process, definitions & criteria as > we > > > learn. > > > > > > Dinesh > > > > > > > On Sep 11, 2019, at 11:15 AM, Sumanth Pasupuleti < > > > sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > One more call for any additional comments/ feedback on the release > > > > lifecycle document > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit# > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Sumanth > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 1:01 AM Sumanth Pasupuleti < > > > > sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Submitted patch to add release lifecycle information to the website > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-15249 > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:57 AM Oleksandr Petrov < > > > >> oleksandr.pet...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Maybe a bit off-topic: > > > >>> > > > >>> Before we cut a release, we should make sure we take care of beta > > > protocol > > > >>> [1], include released driver versions [2] and remove compact > storage > > > >>> remainders [3]. Third one is optional, but I'd argue we should do > it > > > >>> sooner > > > >>> rather than later. > > > >>> > > > >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14973 > > > >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13951 > > > >>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13994 > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 1:25 AM Sumanth Pasupuleti < > > > >>> sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>> > > > Thanks for the feedback Scott. I have incorporated all the > > incremental > > > feedback I have thus far. > > > > > > Looking for any additional feedback folks may have. > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit# > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:54 AM Scott Andreas < > > sc...@paradoxica.net> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Thanks for starting this discussion, Sumanth! Added a round of > > > >>> comments > > > as > > > > well. > > > > > > > > Summarizing my non-binding feedback: I feel that many of the > items > > > >>> under > > > > "Alpha" and "Beta" should be achieved prior to the release of an > > > >>> alpha, > > > > especially those related to correctness/safety, scope lock, > feature > > > > completeness, deprecation, and backwards compatibility. > > Establishing > > > a > > > > higher standard for official project releases (even at the alpha > > and > > > >>> beta > > > > stage) will help us really polish the final build together. > > > > > > > > Ideally, I feel that contributors should have completed extensive > > > > testing/validation to ensure that no critical or severe bugs > exist > > > >>> prior > > > to > > > > the release of an alpha (e.g., data loss, consistency violations, > > > incorrect > > > > responses to queries, etc). Perhaps we can add a line to this > > effect. > > > > > > > > Ensuring that we've met that bar prior to alpha will help us > focus > > > the > > > > final stages of the release on gathering feedback from users + > > > >>> developers > > > > to validate tooling and automation; compatibility with less > > > >>> commonly-used > > > > client libraries, testing new features, evaluating performance > and > > > > stability under their workloads, etc. > > > > > > > > – Scott > > > > > > > > On 6/11/19, 6:45 AM, "Sumanth Pasupuleti" < > > > > sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >Thanks for the feedback on the product stages/ release life > > cycle > > > > document. > > > >I have incorporated the suggestions and looking for any > > additional > > > > feedback > > > >folks may have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit# > > > > > > > >Thanks, > > > >Sumanth > > > > > > > >On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 10:43 PM Scott Andreas < > > > >>> sc...@paradoxica.net > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Echoing Jon’s point here – > > > >> > > > >> JH: “My thinking is I'
Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?
I think silence is a "nothing to add". At least it is from me. On Wed, Sep 25, 2019, 10:57 AM sankalp kohli wrote: > Can we put it on vote(if required) if no one has more comments? > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 5:44 PM Jonathan Koppenhofer > wrote: > > > Nice work... I like this and have no additions/comments at this time > > > > On Wed, Sep 18, 2019, 4:18 PM sankalp kohli > > wrote: > > > > > We added and changed a lot of things to this doc during a discussion in > > > NGCC. Can everyone take a look at it and provide feedback. > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 10:51 PM Dinesh Joshi > wrote: > > > > > > > I have left some comments on the document. Apart from a few > > > clarifications > > > > and some minor changes, I feel its in a good shape. I think we should > > > move > > > > forward with it. We can refine the process, definitions & criteria as > > we > > > > learn. > > > > > > > > Dinesh > > > > > > > > > On Sep 11, 2019, at 11:15 AM, Sumanth Pasupuleti < > > > > sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > One more call for any additional comments/ feedback on the release > > > > > lifecycle document > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit# > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Sumanth > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 1:01 AM Sumanth Pasupuleti < > > > > > sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Submitted patch to add release lifecycle information to the > website > > > > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-15249 > > > > >> > > > > >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:57 AM Oleksandr Petrov < > > > > >> oleksandr.pet...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> Maybe a bit off-topic: > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Before we cut a release, we should make sure we take care of beta > > > > protocol > > > > >>> [1], include released driver versions [2] and remove compact > > storage > > > > >>> remainders [3]. Third one is optional, but I'd argue we should do > > it > > > > >>> sooner > > > > >>> rather than later. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14973 > > > > >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13951 > > > > >>> [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13994 > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 1:25 AM Sumanth Pasupuleti < > > > > >>> sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > Thanks for the feedback Scott. I have incorporated all the > > > incremental > > > > feedback I have thus far. > > > > > > > > Looking for any additional feedback folks may have. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bS6sr-HSrHFjZb0welife6Qx7u3ZDgRiAoENMLYlfz8/edit# > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:54 AM Scott Andreas < > > > sc...@paradoxica.net> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks for starting this discussion, Sumanth! Added a round of > > > > >>> comments > > > > as > > > > > well. > > > > > > > > > > Summarizing my non-binding feedback: I feel that many of the > > items > > > > >>> under > > > > > "Alpha" and "Beta" should be achieved prior to the release of > an > > > > >>> alpha, > > > > > especially those related to correctness/safety, scope lock, > > feature > > > > > completeness, deprecation, and backwards compatibility. > > > Establishing > > > > a > > > > > higher standard for official project releases (even at the > alpha > > > and > > > > >>> beta > > > > > stage) will help us really polish the final build together. > > > > > > > > > > Ideally, I feel that contributors should have completed > extensive > > > > > testing/validation to ensure that no critical or severe bugs > > exist > > > > >>> prior > > > > to > > > > > the release of an alpha (e.g., data loss, consistency > violations, > > > > incorrect > > > > > responses to queries, etc). Perhaps we can add a line to this > > > effect. > > > > > > > > > > Ensuring that we've met that bar prior to alpha will help us > > focus > > > > the > > > > > final stages of the release on gathering feedback from users + > > > > >>> developers > > > > > to validate tooling and automation; compatibility with less > > > > >>> commonly-used > > > > > client libraries, testing new features, evaluating performance > > and > > > > > stability under their workloads, etc. > > > > > > > > > > – Scott > > > > > > > > > > On 6/11/19, 6:45 AM, "Sumanth Pasupuleti" < > > > > > sumanth.pasupuleti...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >Thanks for the feedback on the product stages/ release life > > > cycle > > > > > document. > > > > >I have incorporated the suggestions and looking for any > > > additional > > > > > feedback > > > > >folks may have. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
