osdir.com


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [DISCUSS] Towards Calcite 1.18


Thanks for continuing to push releases forward! Unfortunately I won't be
able to volunteer to be release manager this time around, but I'll try to
set aside some time to go through some PRs.

On Sat, Oct 20, 2018, 02:21 Julian Hyde <jhyde@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> OK, it's now exactly 3 months since 1.17. I think it's time. I think
> we should aim for a first RC a week from today (Friday 26th October).
>
> Can we have a volunteer to be release manager?
>
> Also, there are lots of PRs to review and merge. Please help out with
> that task, committers.
>
> Julian
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 11:00 AM Julian Hyde <jhyde@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > We’ll be sure to get PRs into the release. If you like, you can make the
> JIRA case depend on those 3 cases - that will remind us.
> >
> > (Other contributors: You can do that also, but only if you have a PR
> that you believe is ready to submit.)
> >
> > > On Sep 20, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Andrew Pilloud
> <apilloud@xxxxxxxxxx.INVALID> wrote:
> > >
> > > Beam has a few JIRAs we'd like to see make the next release (which will
> > > enable us to replace 11k lines of code with calls to Calcite). They all
> > > have open PRs.
> > >
> > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2404 Accessing
> > > structured-types is not implemented by the runtime
> > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2529 linq4j should
> promote
> > > integer to floating point when generating function calls
> > > * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2571 TRIM does not
> match
> > > the behavior of most SQL implementations
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 6:38 PM Kevin Risden <krisden@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> 9/25 should be the GA release of JDK 11 according to [1]. Would be
> good to
> > >> ensure that the next release is compatible with it. We should be in
> good
> > >> shape but would be a good release note too.
> > >>
> > >> 1. http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk/11/
> > >>
> > >> Kevin Risden
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018, 20:56 Francis Chuang <francischuang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> For avatica, there are currently 6 open PRs. A few of them appear to
> be
> > >>> blocked due to incompatibilities with JDK or something else. Perhaps
> the
> > >>> situation has now changed and we can get those in for 1.13.
> > >>>
> > >>> On 20/09/2018 9:26 AM, Julian Hyde wrote:
> > >>>> I have logged
> > >>>>
> > >>>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2576 <
> > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2576> Release Avatica
> 1.13
> > >>>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2575 <
> > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2575> Release Calcite
> > >> 1.18.0
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On Sep 19, 2018, at 4:19 PM, Julian Hyde <jhyde@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Calcite 1.17 was released on 20th July (2 months ago) and since
> then
> > >>> there have been almost 100 commits.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Does anyone have constraints on when 1.18 should be released? (My
> > >>> opinion: we should aim for 3 months after 1.17, and therefore we will
> > >> need
> > >>> an RC before 10th October.)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Does anyone have any JIRA cases that they would like to get into
> 1.18
> > >>> but they have not yet finished?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Who would like to be release manager?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Do we need a new Avatica release before we make this Calcite
> release?
> > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2467 <
> > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2467> describes one
> reason
> > >>> to do so: jetty versions. Also, it would be nice if both projects
> used
> > >> the
> > >>> new parent POM (see
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2486 <
> > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2486>) but it’s not
> > >>> essential.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Julian
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>