3.3.3 release

[Benjamin Reed <br...@yahoo-inc.com>]

the 962 bug we fixed was pretty severe. i would like to get a release 
out asap.

i was looking over the bugs tagged for 3.3.3 and almost all of them look 
like the should really be for 3.4. in my opinion only severe bugs should 
be back ported to previous releases, and most of the bugs marked 3.3 
done not meet that criteria. back porting patches creates a burden on 
developers and committers and are also not tested by qa. i think we 
should avoid them.

ben

RE: 3.3.3 release

["Fournier, Camille F. [Tech]" <Ca...@gs.com>]

I would really like to see 962 fix released asap as well.

C

-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin Reed [mailto:breed@yahoo-inc.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 2:27 PM
To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
Subject: 3.3.3 release

the 962 bug we fixed was pretty severe. i would like to get a release 
out asap.

i was looking over the bugs tagged for 3.3.3 and almost all of them look 
like the should really be for 3.4. in my opinion only severe bugs should 
be back ported to previous releases, and most of the bugs marked 3.3 
done not meet that criteria. back porting patches creates a burden on 
developers and committers and are also not tested by qa. i think we 
should avoid them.

ben

Re: 3.3.3 release

[Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org>]

btw, I did a patch for 913 that was to be fixed in 3.3.3, but only got
applied to trunk due to a source conflict. I'll fix the conflict and
commit it to the 3.3 branch for inclusion in 3.3.3 asap.

Patrick

On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> wrote:
> Our typical process is to have a running fix release in parallel with
> the trunk. So 3.3.3 was created in jira after 3.3.2 went out, 3.4.0 is
> trunk. This catches any new issues that might need a fix release
> (3.3.3). We triage the issues marked for the fix release (3.3.3) and
> also apply those changes to the trunk. Only blocker bugs will hold up
> the fix release once we get to a point where people think we should
> release it (say a blocker gets fixed).
>
> It sounds like we're at that point here, where a 3.3.3 release makes
> sense, given 962 is fixed. Looking at 3.3.3 on jira there are
> currently 2 open blockers, once these are addressed (fixed or
> reprioritized) we could spin a release.
>
> Any volunteers to be the release manager for 3.3.3?
>
> Patrick
>
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Benjamin Reed <br...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>> the 962 bug we fixed was pretty severe. i would like to get a release out
>> asap.
>>
>> i was looking over the bugs tagged for 3.3.3 and almost all of them look
>> like the should really be for 3.4. in my opinion only severe bugs should be
>> back ported to previous releases, and most of the bugs marked 3.3 done not
>> meet that criteria. back porting patches creates a burden on developers and
>> committers and are also not tested by qa. i think we should avoid them.
>>
>> ben
>>
>

Re: 3.3.3 release

[Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org>]

Our typical process is to have a running fix release in parallel with
the trunk. So 3.3.3 was created in jira after 3.3.2 went out, 3.4.0 is
trunk. This catches any new issues that might need a fix release
(3.3.3). We triage the issues marked for the fix release (3.3.3) and
also apply those changes to the trunk. Only blocker bugs will hold up
the fix release once we get to a point where people think we should
release it (say a blocker gets fixed).

It sounds like we're at that point here, where a 3.3.3 release makes
sense, given 962 is fixed. Looking at 3.3.3 on jira there are
currently 2 open blockers, once these are addressed (fixed or
reprioritized) we could spin a release.

Any volunteers to be the release manager for 3.3.3?

Patrick

On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Benjamin Reed <br...@yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
> the 962 bug we fixed was pretty severe. i would like to get a release out
> asap.
>
> i was looking over the bugs tagged for 3.3.3 and almost all of them look
> like the should really be for 3.4. in my opinion only severe bugs should be
> back ported to previous releases, and most of the bugs marked 3.3 done not
> meet that criteria. back porting patches creates a burden on developers and
> committers and are also not tested by qa. i think we should avoid them.
>
> ben
>