v1.2 release and migration readiness

Problem

The v1.2 release will include depth expansion, quality improvements, and potentially breaking changes to pack templates or KPI definitions. Users who deployed v1.0 packs need a clear migration path—what changed, what they need to update, and how to upgrade without losing customizations they made to their dashboards. Without release communication, migration guides, and upgrade tooling, the v1.2 release will either break existing deployments silently or force users into manual migration work that erodes trust. The pack publishing workflow itself may also have breaking changes that contributors need to adapt to.

Context

• Deeper or changed behavior in connector-specific dashboard packs and KPI narratives for Fivetran sources often creates migration work for users, operators, or downstream systems, and that work is easy to underestimate until release time.
• This task should make the release path explicit: what is changing, who is affected, what needs communication or tooling help, and how rollback would work if adoption goes sideways.
• Expected touchpoints include dashboard pack YAML, dbt/example assets, connector fixtures, and quickstart docs, release notes, migration docs, compatibility checks, and any support/runbook surfaces that will absorb the change.

Possible Solutions

• A - Treat release readiness as a final checklist after implementation: simple, but it often surfaces migration risk too late to respond well.
• B - Recommended: plan release and migration alongside the feature depth work: document contract changes, compatibility handling, communication, and rollback before the release window.
• C - Force all users onto the new behavior with minimal migration help: faster to ship, but costly in trust and support load.

Plan

1. List the behavior, contract, or configuration changes in connector-specific dashboard packs and KPI narratives for Fivetran sources that could affect users, operators, or downstream consumers.
2. Define the migration path, release notes, compatibility expectations, and any temporary bridges or tooling needed for safe adoption.
3. Confirm the rollback and support posture for the riskiest changes and make sure the release owner surfaces are documented.
4. Review the plan against the actual implementation scope and create follow-up items for anything that cannot safely make the release cut.

Implementation Progress

Review Feedback

• [ ] Review cleared