It's never realistic to say "it's THE last ..." so I guess I agree we
can show a bit of flexibility - but people should not get used to it,
we can not re-establish a plan of regular releases from 5.2.
We have to severely limit the time we can dedicate to it. Also please
make sure people are motivated to update to 5.3, they better have
extremely good reasons to not upgrade, and I would like to know more
about those reasons. Could you take some notes when you hear such war
Of course we can be more flexible with needs of contributors. If
someone needs a backport and is volunteering to do 90% of the work
then we can help, but we can't spend significant more time than
approve changes and trigger the release jobs. No blogs.
On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 at 14:54, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So, it's been a long time since we last released the ORM 5.2 branch and
some people are asking about it, some of them with good reasons not to
upgrade to 5.3.
I think we are making it something big because we wanted it to be THE last
5.2 release and this ends up in it not being released at all.
Also, we have a lot of other things to do, which doesn't help.
I propose the following plan:
- starting September 1st, I'll go through the 5.3 fixes and see what can be
easily backported - we already have important fixes in 5.2.18 so if some
issue is not easily backportable or worth it, I'll skip it altogether and
wait for someone to complain vocally about it;
- I'll wrap up a 5.2.18 by September 14th;
- if we need one more after that, I'll do another release.
If you have a 5.3 fix you absolutely want in 5.2.x, please be vocal about
it because there's a good chance I will be pretty aggressive in not
backporting the bugfixes we pushed to 5.3 recently (e.g. not cherry-picking
gracefully -> not in 5.2.18).
The idea is to let Gail focus as much as possible on the still opened 5.1
-> 5.3 regressions.
Does everybody agree with this plan?
hibernate-dev mailing list