Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Geode 1.7.0 release branch created

[Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>]

Status Update on release process for 1.7.0
- checkPom files are being modified to have version as 1.7.0 instead of
1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
- gradle.properties file has been modified to reflect 1.7.0 as the version.
- Version.java has been reverted to remove all changes corresponding to
1.8.0
- CommandInitializer.java has been reverted to remove changes for 1.8.0
- LuceneIndexCommandsJUnitTest.java has been modified to change
Version.GEODE_180 to GEODE_170
- LuceneIndexCommands.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180 to
GEODE_170
-TXCommitMessage.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180 to
GEODE_170

I will be getting in touch with the individual developers to verify my
changes.
The branch will be update once we get a green light on these changes.

Still need updates on these tickets:

GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]

These tickets have commits into develop but they are still open with fix
version as 1.8.0

Regards
Nabarun Nag



On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:38 PM Dale Emery <de...@pivotal.io> wrote:

> I have resolved GEODE-5254
>
> Dale
>
> > On Aug 31, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Nabarun Nag <nn...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> > Requesting status update on the following JIRA tickets. These tickets
> have
> > commits into develop against its name but the status is still open /
> > unresolved.
> >
> > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
> > GEODE-5254 - [Dale Emery]
> >
> > GEODE-4794 - [Sai]
> > GEODE-5594 - [Sai]
> >
> > Regards
> > Nabarun Nag
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:18 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Please continue using 1.7.0 as a fix version in JIRA till the email
> comes
> >> in that the 1.7.0 release branch has be cut.
> >>
> >> Changing the fixed version for the following tickets to 1.7.0 from 1.8.0
> >> as these fixes will be included in the 1.7.0 release
> >>
> >> GEODE-5671
> >> GEODE-5662
> >> GEODE-5660
> >> GEODE-5652
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Nabarun Nag
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:20 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> A new feature of get/set cluster config was added as new feature to
> gfsh.
> >>> This needs to be added to the documentation.
> >>> Once this is done, the branch will be ready.
> >>>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Nabarun
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:15 PM Alexander Murmann <amurmann@pivotal.io
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Nabarun, do you still see anything blocking cutting the release at
> this
> >>>> point?
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe we can even get a pipeline going today? 😳
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> >>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> We can go ahead and cut 1.7 with out GEODE-5338 as I don't have the
> >>>> code
> >>>>> ready.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> GEODE-5594, adds a new flag to enable hostname validation and is
> >>>> disabled
> >>>>> by default so we are good with changes that are already merged and
> >>>>> documentation for GEODE-5594 is ready merged.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Naba, after the branch is cut we should delete windows jobs from the
> >>>> branch
> >>>>> before we create the pipeline for 1.7.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Apologies for holding up the release.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sai.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, 10:23 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I am waiting on the documentation tickets to get closed before
> >>>> cutting
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>> branch.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:18 AM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Perhaps we should cut 1.7.0 without these changes to give us more
> >>>> time
> >>>>> to
> >>>>>>> review and complete the work.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thoughts?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Anthony
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Aug 31, 2018, at 8:03 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> >>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I haven't yet merged GEODE-5338. The PR changes the existing
> >>>> behavior
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>> is not acceptable.
> >>>>>>>> Working on changing the implementation to have a default value
> >>>>> derived
> >>>>>>>> based on how user
> >>>>>>>> wants to configure SSL.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Sai
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:45 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> >>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I have merged GEODE-5594 to develop.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is now waiting for PR review and precheckin.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Sai
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> >>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is downvoted for the security concerns related to
> >>>>> trusting
> >>>>>>>>>> the default trust store and thus resulted in an improvement to
> >>>> add
> >>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>>> hostname
> >>>>>>>>>> validation as a feature before we can support trusting default
> >>>>> trust
> >>>>>>>>>> store.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> So GEODE-5338 is blocked by GEODE-5594.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Once I merge GEODE-5594, I will reinitiate review on
> >>>> GEODE-5338 PR.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Sai
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexander Murmann <
> >>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Looks like we are now waiting for these tickets:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 which is a dup of GEODE-5590 which has this open
> >>>> PR:
> >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2368.
> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5594 has open PR:
> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346
> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 <
> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346GEODE-5338>
> >>>>>> has
> >>>>>>>>>>> open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2244.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Does this look right?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> The GEODE-5338 ticket is the most concerning to me right now.
> >>>> The
> >>>>> PR
> >>>>>>> was
> >>>>>>>>>>> down voted, had some down voted discussion and nothing since.
> >>>> Sai
> >>>>>>>>>>> mentioned
> >>>>>>>>>>> yesterday that this might be able to merge. That's surprising
> >>>>> given
> >>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>> downvotes and lack of discussion. Sai, do you want to give us
> >>>> a
> >>>>>>> update,
> >>>>>>>>>>> maybe on the PR?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Juan José Ramos <
> >>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:13 AM Nabarun Nag <nnag@apache.org
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Juan,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5618 as PR#2360 has been merged in to develop. The new
> >>>>>> branch
> >>>>>>>>>>> has
> >>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> yet been created hence this fix will be in 1.7.0
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM Juan José Ramos <
> >>>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello team,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we also include GEODE-5618 in the next release?. The
> >>>> pull
> >>>>>>>>>>> request
> >>>>>>>>>>>> has
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been approved already, it just needs to be merged.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:45 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great!  thanks
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 1:42 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I completely agree. Once the branch is created, it will
> >>>>>>>>>>> undergo all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility and upgrade tests.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit that you have mentioned will be reverted in
> >>>> 1.7.0,
> >>>>>>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>> well
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any related commits
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's as easy as doing a rebase.  Someone
> >>>> added
> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version to Version.java and we need to revert that.  We
> >>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>>> need
> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> see
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if it's being used anywhere for
> >>>> backward-compatibility.  If
> >>>>>>>>>>> it's
> >>>>>>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those changes need to be examined and probably undone
> >>>> on the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> if
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they're targeting 1.7 peers/clients.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 12:11 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Bruce those changes were done when 1.7.0 release
> >>>> process
> >>>>> was
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in-progress,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a release branch was already created. But we
> >>>> stopped
> >>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> process
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mid
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way. This happened in May 2018.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are planning to rebase the 1.7.0 brach with the
> >>>> current
> >>>>>>>>>>>> develop
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we've cut a 1.7.0 release branch that
> >>>> says
> >>>>> its
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8.0.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that intentional?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private static final byte GEODE_180_ORDINAL =95;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public static final VersionGEODE_180 =
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      new Version("GEODE","1.8.0", (byte)1, (byte)8,
> >>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,GEODE_180_ORDINAL);
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 9:50 AM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After reading through the weekend, validating
> >>>> against CN
> >>>>>>>>>>> as a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback should be acceptable and dont have any
> >>>> further
> >>>>>>>>>>>> concerns
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with default JDK's implementation as expressed[1].
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Planning to merge GEODE-5594 today and following with
> >>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/906540e18fa6f85fc77c88c28fc74a
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 61402471d2eed4ee9dab4813c9@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding GEODE-5594, though the current
> >>>> implementation
> >>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>> good
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more coverage.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While adding tests to cover negative cases, I found
> >>>>>>>>>>> something
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK's
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> default implementation of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hostname validation which I am not happy about and
> >>>> so it
> >>>>>>>>>>>> needs a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rethought. It could result in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementing our own custom algorithm to do hostname
> >>>>>>>>>>>> validation.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will send out details and seek to advise on what
> >>>> we
> >>>>>>>>>>> should
> >>>>>>>>>>>> do
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different thread.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:52 AM Alexander Murmann <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To summarize where we are right now in this
> >>>> discussion,
> >>>>>>>>>>> I see
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tickets listed in this thread as want-to-haves for
> >>>> 1.7:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5615 - ✅ resolved
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5601 - 🏃‍♀️ in progress
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5594 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5338 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5619 - 🙄 in progress in JIRA but has
> >>>>>>>>>>> merged
> >>>>>>>>>>>> PR.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     mean?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that needs to go into 1.7?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems like the best we all can do is to review
> >>>> Sai's
> >>>>>>>>>>> PRs.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Jens Deppe <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jdeppe@pivotal.io>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to include GEODE-5619
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:59 PM Xiaojian Zhou <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> gzhou@pivotal.io
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release will be a great one with so many
> >>>>> historical
> >>>>>>>>>>>> bugs
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today I tried to use IJ to build and run with
> >>>> latest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> build.gradle
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent moved test packages, it worked. So this
> >>>>>>>>>>> refactoring
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Anthony Baker <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abaker@pivotal.io>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I most definitely agree!
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Dan Smith <
> >>>>>>>>>>>> dsmith@pivotal.io>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we do want to wait for GEODE-5615
> >>>>>>>>>>>> (DistributedTest
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OOMEs)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 (AcceptanceTest port conflicts) to
> >>>> be
> >>>>>>>>>>> fixed
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> before
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new 1.7 branch. It would be better if we don't
> >>>>>>>>>>> create a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a point where we have these systematic issues
> >>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>>> our
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pipeline.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >>>>>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >>>>>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269>
> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >>>>>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
> >>>> 16:00
> >>>>> GMT
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
> >>>>> twitter]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
> >>>> facebook]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google
> >>>>> plus]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269>
> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 - 16:00
> >>>> GMT
> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
> >>>> twitter]
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image: facebook]
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google
> >>>> plus]
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Geode 1.7.0 release branch created

[Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>]

[UPDATE]
Cherry-picking 156333bfc397c96963e7af598897066989ff0d4e GEODE-5695 to
release branch

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:45 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:

> >>>>So the issue is that it takes longer to start than previous releases?
> Yes
>
> >>>>Also, is this wait time only when using Gfsh to create
> gateway-receiver?
> No, even APIs
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:43 PM Anilkumar Gingade <ag...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
>> Its not gfsh specific. Its in the Gateway receiver start.
>>
>> It looks like the changes with GEODE-5591 still hit the earlier issue (it
>> was fixing) if the port is same as the port returned by
>> "getPortToStart()",
>> that was removed. I may be wrong.
>>
>> -Anil.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:39 PM Sai Boorlagadda <sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > So the issue is that it takes longer to start than previous releases?
>> > Also, is this wait time only when using Gfsh to create gateway-receiver?
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:03 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Currently we have a minor issue in the release branch as pointed out
>> by
>> > > Barry O.
>> > > We will wait till a resolution is figured out for this issue.
>> > >
>> > > Steps:
>> > > 1. create locator
>> > > 2. start server --name=server1 --server-port=40404
>> > > 3. start server --name=server2 --server-port=40405
>> > > 4. create gateway-receiver --member=server1
>> > > 5. create gateway-receiver --member=server2 `This gets stuck for 2
>> > minutes`
>> > >
>> > > Is the 2 minute wait time acceptable? Should we document it? When we
>> > revert
>> > > GEODE-5591, this issue does not happen.
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > > Nabarun Nag
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:50 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Status Update on release process for 1.7.0
>> > > > - checkPom files are being modified to have version as 1.7.0
>> instead of
>> > > > 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
>> > > > - gradle.properties file has been modified to reflect 1.7.0 as the
>> > > version.
>> > > > - Version.java has been reverted to remove all changes
>> corresponding to
>> > > > 1.8.0
>> > > > - CommandInitializer.java has been reverted to remove changes for
>> 1.8.0
>> > > > - LuceneIndexCommandsJUnitTest.java has been modified to change
>> > > > Version.GEODE_180 to GEODE_170
>> > > > - LuceneIndexCommands.java has been modified to change
>> > Version.GEODE_180
>> > > > to GEODE_170
>> > > > -TXCommitMessage.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180
>> to
>> > > > GEODE_170
>> > > >
>> > > > I will be getting in touch with the individual developers to verify
>> my
>> > > > changes.
>> > > > The branch will be update once we get a green light on these
>> changes.
>> > > >
>> > > > Still need updates on these tickets:
>> > > >
>> > > > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
>> > > > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
>> > > > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
>> > > > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
>> > > >
>> > > > These tickets have commits into develop but they are still open with
>> > fix
>> > > > version as 1.8.0
>> > > >
>> > > > Regards
>> > > > Nabarun Nag
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:38 PM Dale Emery <de...@pivotal.io>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> I have resolved GEODE-5254
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Dale
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > On Aug 31, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Nabarun Nag <nn...@pivotal.io>
>> wrote:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > Requesting status update on the following JIRA tickets. These
>> > tickets
>> > > >> have
>> > > >> > commits into develop against its name but the status is still
>> open /
>> > > >> > unresolved.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
>> > > >> > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
>> > > >> > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
>> > > >> > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
>> > > >> > GEODE-5254 - [Dale Emery]
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > GEODE-4794 - [Sai]
>> > > >> > GEODE-5594 - [Sai]
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > Regards
>> > > >> > Nabarun Nag
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:18 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> Please continue using 1.7.0 as a fix version in JIRA till the
>> email
>> > > >> comes
>> > > >> >> in that the 1.7.0 release branch has be cut.
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> Changing the fixed version for the following tickets to 1.7.0
>> from
>> > > >> 1.8.0
>> > > >> >> as these fixes will be included in the 1.7.0 release
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> GEODE-5671
>> > > >> >> GEODE-5662
>> > > >> >> GEODE-5660
>> > > >> >> GEODE-5652
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> Regards
>> > > >> >> Nabarun Nag
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:20 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>> A new feature of get/set cluster config was added as new
>> feature
>> > to
>> > > >> gfsh.
>> > > >> >>> This needs to be added to the documentation.
>> > > >> >>> Once this is done, the branch will be ready.
>> > > >> >>>
>> > > >> >>> Regards
>> > > >> >>> Nabarun
>> > > >> >>>
>> > > >> >>>
>> > > >> >>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:15 PM Alexander Murmann <
>> > > >> amurmann@pivotal.io>
>> > > >> >>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>
>> > > >> >>>> Nabarun, do you still see anything blocking cutting the
>> release
>> > at
>> > > >> this
>> > > >> >>>> point?
>> > > >> >>>>
>> > > >> >>>> Maybe we can even get a pipeline going today? 😳
>> > > >> >>>>
>> > > >> >>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
>> > > >> >>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
>> > > >> >>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>
>> > > >> >>>>> We can go ahead and cut 1.7 with out GEODE-5338 as I don't
>> have
>> > > the
>> > > >> >>>> code
>> > > >> >>>>> ready.
>> > > >> >>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>> GEODE-5594, adds a new flag to enable hostname validation
>> and is
>> > > >> >>>> disabled
>> > > >> >>>>> by default so we are good with changes that are already
>> merged
>> > and
>> > > >> >>>>> documentation for GEODE-5594 is ready merged.
>> > > >> >>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>> Naba, after the branch is cut we should delete windows jobs
>> from
>> > > the
>> > > >> >>>> branch
>> > > >> >>>>> before we create the pipeline for 1.7.
>> > > >> >>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>> Apologies for holding up the release.
>> > > >> >>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>> Sai.
>> > > >> >>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, 10:23 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>> I am waiting on the documentation tickets to get closed
>> before
>> > > >> >>>> cutting
>> > > >> >>>>> the
>> > > >> >>>>>> branch.
>> > > >> >>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>> Regards
>> > > >> >>>>>> Nabarun Nag
>> > > >> >>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:18 AM Anthony Baker <
>> > > abaker@pivotal.io>
>> > > >> >>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>> Perhaps we should cut 1.7.0 without these changes to give
>> us
>> > > more
>> > > >> >>>> time
>> > > >> >>>>> to
>> > > >> >>>>>>> review and complete the work.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>> Thoughts?
>> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>> Anthony
>> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>> On Aug 31, 2018, at 8:03 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
>> > > >> >>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
>> > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>> I haven't yet merged GEODE-5338. The PR changes the
>> existing
>> > > >> >>>> behavior
>> > > >> >>>>>> and
>> > > >> >>>>>>>> is not acceptable.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>> Working on changing the implementation to have a default
>> > value
>> > > >> >>>>> derived
>> > > >> >>>>>>>> based on how user
>> > > >> >>>>>>>> wants to configure SSL.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>> Sai
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:45 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
>> > > >> >>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> I have merged GEODE-5594 to develop.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is now waiting for PR review and precheckin.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> Sai
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is downvoted for the security concerns
>> related
>> > to
>> > > >> >>>>> trusting
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> the default trust store and thus resulted in an
>> improvement
>> > > to
>> > > >> >>>> add
>> > > >> >>>>> a
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> hostname
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> validation as a feature before we can support trusting
>> > > default
>> > > >> >>>>> trust
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> store.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> So GEODE-5338 is blocked by GEODE-5594.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Once I merge GEODE-5594, I will reinitiate review on
>> > > >> >>>> GEODE-5338 PR.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Sai
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexander Murmann <
>> > > >> >>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Looks like we are now waiting for these tickets:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 which is a dup of GEODE-5590 which has this
>> > open
>> > > >> >>>> PR:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2368.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5594 has open PR:
>> > > >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 <
>> > > >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346GEODE-5338>
>> > > >> >>>>>> has
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2244.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Does this look right?
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The GEODE-5338 ticket is the most concerning to me
>> right
>> > > now.
>> > > >> >>>> The
>> > > >> >>>>> PR
>> > > >> >>>>>>> was
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> down voted, had some down voted discussion and nothing
>> > > since.
>> > > >> >>>> Sai
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> mentioned
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> yesterday that this might be able to merge. That's
>> > > surprising
>> > > >> >>>>> given
>> > > >> >>>>>>> the
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> downvotes and lack of discussion. Sai, do you want to
>> give
>> > > us
>> > > >> >>>> a
>> > > >> >>>>>>> update,
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> maybe on the PR?
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Juan José Ramos <
>> > > >> >>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
>> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!!
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:13 AM Nabarun Nag <
>> > > nnag@apache.org
>> > > >> >>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Juan,
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5618 as PR#2360 has been merged in to develop.
>> The
>> > > new
>> > > >> >>>>>> branch
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> has
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> not
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> yet been created hence this fix will be in 1.7.0
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM Juan José Ramos <
>> > > >> >>>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello team,
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we also include GEODE-5618 in the next release?.
>> > The
>> > > >> >>>> pull
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> request
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> has
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been approved already, it just needs to be merged.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:45 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great!  thanks
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 1:42 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I completely agree. Once the branch is created, it
>> > will
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> undergo all
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility and upgrade tests.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit that you have mentioned will be
>> reverted
>> > in
>> > > >> >>>> 1.7.0,
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> as
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> well
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any related commits
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's as easy as doing a rebase.
>> > Someone
>> > > >> >>>> added
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version to Version.java and we need to revert
>> that.
>> > > We
>> > > >> >>>> also
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> need
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> see
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if it's being used anywhere for
>> > > >> >>>> backward-compatibility.  If
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> it's
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> in
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those changes need to be examined and probably
>> > undone
>> > > >> >>>> on the
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> branch
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> if
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they're targeting 1.7 peers/clients.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 12:11 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Bruce those changes were done when 1.7.0
>> release
>> > > >> >>>> process
>> > > >> >>>>> was
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in-progress,
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a release branch was already created. But we
>> > > >> >>>> stopped
>> > > >> >>>>> that
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> process
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mid
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way. This happened in May 2018.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are planning to rebase the 1.7.0 brach with
>> the
>> > > >> >>>> current
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> develop
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM Bruce
>> Schuchardt <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we've cut a 1.7.0 release branch
>> > that
>> > > >> >>>> says
>> > > >> >>>>> its
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8.0.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that intentional?
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private static final byte GEODE_180_ORDINAL
>> =95;
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public static final VersionGEODE_180 =
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      new Version("GEODE","1.8.0", (byte)1,
>> > (byte)8,
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,GEODE_180_ORDINAL);
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 9:50 AM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After reading through the weekend, validating
>> > > >> >>>> against CN
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> as a
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback should be acceptable and dont have
>> any
>> > > >> >>>> further
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> concerns
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with default JDK's implementation as
>> > expressed[1].
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Planning to merge GEODE-5594 today and
>> following
>> > > with
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>
>> > > >>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/906540e18fa6f85fc77c88c28fc74a
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 61402471d2eed4ee9dab4813c9@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM Sai
>> Boorlagadda <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding GEODE-5594, though the current
>> > > >> >>>> implementation
>> > > >> >>>>> is
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> good
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more coverage.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While adding tests to cover negative cases, I
>> > > found
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> something
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK's
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> default implementation of
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hostname validation which I am not happy
>> about
>> > and
>> > > >> >>>> so it
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> needs a
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rethought. It could result in
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementing our own custom algorithm to do
>> > > hostname
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> validation.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will send out details and seek to advise on
>> > what
>> > > >> >>>> we
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> should
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> do
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different thread.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:52 AM Alexander
>> > > Murmann <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To summarize where we are right now in this
>> > > >> >>>> discussion,
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I see
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tickets listed in this thread as
>> want-to-haves
>> > > for
>> > > >> >>>> 1.7:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5615 - ✅ resolved
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5601 - 🏃‍♀️ in progress
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5594 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR
>> review
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5338 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR
>> review
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5619 - 🙄 in progress in JIRA
>> but
>> > has
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> merged
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> PR.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     mean?
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that needs to go into
>> > 1.7?
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems like the best we all can do is to
>> > review
>> > > >> >>>> Sai's
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> PRs.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct?
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Jens
>> Deppe <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jdeppe@pivotal.io>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to include GEODE-5619
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:59 PM Xiaojian
>> Zhou
>> > <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> gzhou@pivotal.io
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release will be a great one with so
>> many
>> > > >> >>>>> historical
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> bugs
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today I tried to use IJ to build and run
>> with
>> > > >> >>>> latest
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> build.gradle
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent moved test packages, it worked. So
>> > this
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> refactoring
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Anthony
>> > Baker
>> > > <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abaker@pivotal.io>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I most definitely agree!
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Dan Smith <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> dsmith@pivotal.io>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we do want to wait for
>> GEODE-5615
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> (DistributedTest
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OOMEs)
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 (AcceptanceTest port
>> conflicts)
>> > to
>> > > >> >>>> be
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> fixed
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> before
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new 1.7 branch. It would be better if we
>> > > don't
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> create a
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a point where we have these systematic
>> > issues
>> > > >> >>>> with
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> our
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pipeline.
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> > > >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> > > >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> > > >> >>>>>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> > > >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> > > >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> > > >> >>>>>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269
>> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> > <(877)%20477-2269>
>> > > >> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> > > >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> > > >> >>>>>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri
>> 08:30 -
>> > > >> >>>> 16:00
>> > > >> >>>>> GMT
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/>
>> [image:
>> > > >> >>>>> twitter]
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
>> > > >> >>>> facebook]
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image:
>> > > google
>> > > >> >>>>> plus]
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
>> > > >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> > > >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> > > >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> > > >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> > > >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269
>> <(877)%20477-2269> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> > > >> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> > > >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
>> > > 16:00
>> > > >> >>>> GMT
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/>
>> [image:
>> > > >> >>>> twitter]
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
>> > > facebook]
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image:
>> > google
>> > > >> >>>> plus]
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
>> > > >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>>
>> > > >> >>>>
>> > > >> >>>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Geode 1.7.0 release branch created

[Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>]

>>>>So the issue is that it takes longer to start than previous releases?
Yes
>>>>Also, is this wait time only when using Gfsh to create gateway-receiver?
No, even APIs


On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:43 PM Anilkumar Gingade <ag...@pivotal.io>
wrote:

> Its not gfsh specific. Its in the Gateway receiver start.
>
> It looks like the changes with GEODE-5591 still hit the earlier issue (it
> was fixing) if the port is same as the port returned by "getPortToStart()",
> that was removed. I may be wrong.
>
> -Anil.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:39 PM Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > So the issue is that it takes longer to start than previous releases?
> > Also, is this wait time only when using Gfsh to create gateway-receiver?
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:03 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Currently we have a minor issue in the release branch as pointed out by
> > > Barry O.
> > > We will wait till a resolution is figured out for this issue.
> > >
> > > Steps:
> > > 1. create locator
> > > 2. start server --name=server1 --server-port=40404
> > > 3. start server --name=server2 --server-port=40405
> > > 4. create gateway-receiver --member=server1
> > > 5. create gateway-receiver --member=server2 `This gets stuck for 2
> > minutes`
> > >
> > > Is the 2 minute wait time acceptable? Should we document it? When we
> > revert
> > > GEODE-5591, this issue does not happen.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Nabarun Nag
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:50 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Status Update on release process for 1.7.0
> > > > - checkPom files are being modified to have version as 1.7.0 instead
> of
> > > > 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
> > > > - gradle.properties file has been modified to reflect 1.7.0 as the
> > > version.
> > > > - Version.java has been reverted to remove all changes corresponding
> to
> > > > 1.8.0
> > > > - CommandInitializer.java has been reverted to remove changes for
> 1.8.0
> > > > - LuceneIndexCommandsJUnitTest.java has been modified to change
> > > > Version.GEODE_180 to GEODE_170
> > > > - LuceneIndexCommands.java has been modified to change
> > Version.GEODE_180
> > > > to GEODE_170
> > > > -TXCommitMessage.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180
> to
> > > > GEODE_170
> > > >
> > > > I will be getting in touch with the individual developers to verify
> my
> > > > changes.
> > > > The branch will be update once we get a green light on these changes.
> > > >
> > > > Still need updates on these tickets:
> > > >
> > > > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> > > > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> > > > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> > > > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
> > > >
> > > > These tickets have commits into develop but they are still open with
> > fix
> > > > version as 1.8.0
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > Nabarun Nag
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:38 PM Dale Emery <de...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I have resolved GEODE-5254
> > > >>
> > > >> Dale
> > > >>
> > > >> > On Aug 31, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Nabarun Nag <nn...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Requesting status update on the following JIRA tickets. These
> > tickets
> > > >> have
> > > >> > commits into develop against its name but the status is still
> open /
> > > >> > unresolved.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> > > >> > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> > > >> > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> > > >> > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
> > > >> > GEODE-5254 - [Dale Emery]
> > > >> >
> > > >> > GEODE-4794 - [Sai]
> > > >> > GEODE-5594 - [Sai]
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Regards
> > > >> > Nabarun Nag
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:18 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Please continue using 1.7.0 as a fix version in JIRA till the
> email
> > > >> comes
> > > >> >> in that the 1.7.0 release branch has be cut.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Changing the fixed version for the following tickets to 1.7.0
> from
> > > >> 1.8.0
> > > >> >> as these fixes will be included in the 1.7.0 release
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> GEODE-5671
> > > >> >> GEODE-5662
> > > >> >> GEODE-5660
> > > >> >> GEODE-5652
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Regards
> > > >> >> Nabarun Nag
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:20 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>> A new feature of get/set cluster config was added as new feature
> > to
> > > >> gfsh.
> > > >> >>> This needs to be added to the documentation.
> > > >> >>> Once this is done, the branch will be ready.
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> Regards
> > > >> >>> Nabarun
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:15 PM Alexander Murmann <
> > > >> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> > > >> >>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>>> Nabarun, do you still see anything blocking cutting the release
> > at
> > > >> this
> > > >> >>>> point?
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>> Maybe we can even get a pipeline going today? 😳
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> > > >> >>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
> > > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>>> We can go ahead and cut 1.7 with out GEODE-5338 as I don't
> have
> > > the
> > > >> >>>> code
> > > >> >>>>> ready.
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>> GEODE-5594, adds a new flag to enable hostname validation and
> is
> > > >> >>>> disabled
> > > >> >>>>> by default so we are good with changes that are already merged
> > and
> > > >> >>>>> documentation for GEODE-5594 is ready merged.
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>> Naba, after the branch is cut we should delete windows jobs
> from
> > > the
> > > >> >>>> branch
> > > >> >>>>> before we create the pipeline for 1.7.
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>> Apologies for holding up the release.
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>> Sai.
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, 10:23 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>> I am waiting on the documentation tickets to get closed
> before
> > > >> >>>> cutting
> > > >> >>>>> the
> > > >> >>>>>> branch.
> > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>> Regards
> > > >> >>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:18 AM Anthony Baker <
> > > abaker@pivotal.io>
> > > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>> Perhaps we should cut 1.7.0 without these changes to give us
> > > more
> > > >> >>>> time
> > > >> >>>>> to
> > > >> >>>>>>> review and complete the work.
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>> Thoughts?
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>> Anthony
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>> On Aug 31, 2018, at 8:03 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> > > >> >>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>> I haven't yet merged GEODE-5338. The PR changes the
> existing
> > > >> >>>> behavior
> > > >> >>>>>> and
> > > >> >>>>>>>> is not acceptable.
> > > >> >>>>>>>> Working on changing the implementation to have a default
> > value
> > > >> >>>>> derived
> > > >> >>>>>>>> based on how user
> > > >> >>>>>>>> wants to configure SSL.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>> Sai
> > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:45 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> > > >> >>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> > > >> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> I have merged GEODE-5594 to develop.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is now waiting for PR review and precheckin.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> Sai
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is downvoted for the security concerns related
> > to
> > > >> >>>>> trusting
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> the default trust store and thus resulted in an
> improvement
> > > to
> > > >> >>>> add
> > > >> >>>>> a
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> hostname
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> validation as a feature before we can support trusting
> > > default
> > > >> >>>>> trust
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> store.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> So GEODE-5338 is blocked by GEODE-5594.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Once I merge GEODE-5594, I will reinitiate review on
> > > >> >>>> GEODE-5338 PR.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Sai
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexander Murmann <
> > > >> >>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Looks like we are now waiting for these tickets:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 which is a dup of GEODE-5590 which has this
> > open
> > > >> >>>> PR:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2368.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5594 has open PR:
> > > >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 <
> > > >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346GEODE-5338>
> > > >> >>>>>> has
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2244.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Does this look right?
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The GEODE-5338 ticket is the most concerning to me right
> > > now.
> > > >> >>>> The
> > > >> >>>>> PR
> > > >> >>>>>>> was
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> down voted, had some down voted discussion and nothing
> > > since.
> > > >> >>>> Sai
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> mentioned
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> yesterday that this might be able to merge. That's
> > > surprising
> > > >> >>>>> given
> > > >> >>>>>>> the
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> downvotes and lack of discussion. Sai, do you want to
> give
> > > us
> > > >> >>>> a
> > > >> >>>>>>> update,
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> maybe on the PR?
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Juan José Ramos <
> > > >> >>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!!
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:13 AM Nabarun Nag <
> > > nnag@apache.org
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Juan,
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5618 as PR#2360 has been merged in to develop.
> The
> > > new
> > > >> >>>>>> branch
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> has
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> not
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> yet been created hence this fix will be in 1.7.0
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM Juan José Ramos <
> > > >> >>>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello team,
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we also include GEODE-5618 in the next release?.
> > The
> > > >> >>>> pull
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> request
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> has
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been approved already, it just needs to be merged.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:45 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great!  thanks
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 1:42 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I completely agree. Once the branch is created, it
> > will
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> undergo all
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility and upgrade tests.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit that you have mentioned will be reverted
> > in
> > > >> >>>> 1.7.0,
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> as
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> well
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any related commits
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's as easy as doing a rebase.
> > Someone
> > > >> >>>> added
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version to Version.java and we need to revert
> that.
> > > We
> > > >> >>>> also
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> need
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> see
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if it's being used anywhere for
> > > >> >>>> backward-compatibility.  If
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> it's
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> in
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those changes need to be examined and probably
> > undone
> > > >> >>>> on the
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> if
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they're targeting 1.7 peers/clients.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 12:11 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Bruce those changes were done when 1.7.0 release
> > > >> >>>> process
> > > >> >>>>> was
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in-progress,
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a release branch was already created. But we
> > > >> >>>> stopped
> > > >> >>>>> that
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> process
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mid
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way. This happened in May 2018.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are planning to rebase the 1.7.0 brach with
> the
> > > >> >>>> current
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> develop
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM Bruce
> Schuchardt <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we've cut a 1.7.0 release branch
> > that
> > > >> >>>> says
> > > >> >>>>> its
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8.0.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that intentional?
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private static final byte GEODE_180_ORDINAL =95;
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public static final VersionGEODE_180 =
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      new Version("GEODE","1.8.0", (byte)1,
> > (byte)8,
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,GEODE_180_ORDINAL);
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 9:50 AM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After reading through the weekend, validating
> > > >> >>>> against CN
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> as a
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback should be acceptable and dont have any
> > > >> >>>> further
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> concerns
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with default JDK's implementation as
> > expressed[1].
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Planning to merge GEODE-5594 today and
> following
> > > with
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/906540e18fa6f85fc77c88c28fc74a
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 61402471d2eed4ee9dab4813c9@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM Sai
> Boorlagadda <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding GEODE-5594, though the current
> > > >> >>>> implementation
> > > >> >>>>> is
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> good
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more coverage.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While adding tests to cover negative cases, I
> > > found
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> something
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK's
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> default implementation of
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hostname validation which I am not happy about
> > and
> > > >> >>>> so it
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> needs a
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rethought. It could result in
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementing our own custom algorithm to do
> > > hostname
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> validation.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will send out details and seek to advise on
> > what
> > > >> >>>> we
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> should
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> do
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different thread.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:52 AM Alexander
> > > Murmann <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To summarize where we are right now in this
> > > >> >>>> discussion,
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I see
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tickets listed in this thread as
> want-to-haves
> > > for
> > > >> >>>> 1.7:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5615 - ✅ resolved
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5601 - 🏃‍♀️ in progress
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5594 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR
> review
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5338 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR
> review
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5619 - 🙄 in progress in JIRA but
> > has
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> merged
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> PR.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     mean?
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that needs to go into
> > 1.7?
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems like the best we all can do is to
> > review
> > > >> >>>> Sai's
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> PRs.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct?
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Jens Deppe
> <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jdeppe@pivotal.io>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to include GEODE-5619
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:59 PM Xiaojian
> Zhou
> > <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> gzhou@pivotal.io
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release will be a great one with so
> many
> > > >> >>>>> historical
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> bugs
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today I tried to use IJ to build and run
> with
> > > >> >>>> latest
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> build.gradle
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent moved test packages, it worked. So
> > this
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> refactoring
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Anthony
> > Baker
> > > <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abaker@pivotal.io>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I most definitely agree!
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Dan Smith <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> dsmith@pivotal.io>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we do want to wait for GEODE-5615
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> (DistributedTest
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OOMEs)
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 (AcceptanceTest port
> conflicts)
> > to
> > > >> >>>> be
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> fixed
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> before
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new 1.7 branch. It would be better if we
> > > don't
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> create a
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a point where we have these systematic
> > issues
> > > >> >>>> with
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> our
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pipeline.
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > > >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > > >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > > >> >>>>>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > > >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > > >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > > >> >>>>>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269
> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > <(877)%20477-2269>
> > > >> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > > >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > > >> >>>>>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30
> -
> > > >> >>>> 16:00
> > > >> >>>>> GMT
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/>
> [image:
> > > >> >>>>> twitter]
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
> > > >> >>>> facebook]
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image:
> > > google
> > > >> >>>>> plus]
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> > > >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > > >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > > >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > > >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > > >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269
> <(877)%20477-2269> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > > >> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > > >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
> > > 16:00
> > > >> >>>> GMT
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
> > > >> >>>> twitter]
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
> > > facebook]
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image:
> > google
> > > >> >>>> plus]
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> > > >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>>
> > > >> >>>>>
> > > >> >>>>
> > > >> >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Geode 1.7.0 release branch created

[Anilkumar Gingade <ag...@pivotal.io>]

Its not gfsh specific. Its in the Gateway receiver start.

It looks like the changes with GEODE-5591 still hit the earlier issue (it
was fixing) if the port is same as the port returned by "getPortToStart()",
that was removed. I may be wrong.

-Anil.


On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:39 PM Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> So the issue is that it takes longer to start than previous releases?
> Also, is this wait time only when using Gfsh to create gateway-receiver?
>
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:03 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Currently we have a minor issue in the release branch as pointed out by
> > Barry O.
> > We will wait till a resolution is figured out for this issue.
> >
> > Steps:
> > 1. create locator
> > 2. start server --name=server1 --server-port=40404
> > 3. start server --name=server2 --server-port=40405
> > 4. create gateway-receiver --member=server1
> > 5. create gateway-receiver --member=server2 `This gets stuck for 2
> minutes`
> >
> > Is the 2 minute wait time acceptable? Should we document it? When we
> revert
> > GEODE-5591, this issue does not happen.
> >
> > Regards
> > Nabarun Nag
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:50 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Status Update on release process for 1.7.0
> > > - checkPom files are being modified to have version as 1.7.0 instead of
> > > 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
> > > - gradle.properties file has been modified to reflect 1.7.0 as the
> > version.
> > > - Version.java has been reverted to remove all changes corresponding to
> > > 1.8.0
> > > - CommandInitializer.java has been reverted to remove changes for 1.8.0
> > > - LuceneIndexCommandsJUnitTest.java has been modified to change
> > > Version.GEODE_180 to GEODE_170
> > > - LuceneIndexCommands.java has been modified to change
> Version.GEODE_180
> > > to GEODE_170
> > > -TXCommitMessage.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180 to
> > > GEODE_170
> > >
> > > I will be getting in touch with the individual developers to verify my
> > > changes.
> > > The branch will be update once we get a green light on these changes.
> > >
> > > Still need updates on these tickets:
> > >
> > > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> > > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> > > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> > > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
> > >
> > > These tickets have commits into develop but they are still open with
> fix
> > > version as 1.8.0
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Nabarun Nag
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:38 PM Dale Emery <de...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I have resolved GEODE-5254
> > >>
> > >> Dale
> > >>
> > >> > On Aug 31, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Nabarun Nag <nn...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Requesting status update on the following JIRA tickets. These
> tickets
> > >> have
> > >> > commits into develop against its name but the status is still open /
> > >> > unresolved.
> > >> >
> > >> > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> > >> > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> > >> > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> > >> > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
> > >> > GEODE-5254 - [Dale Emery]
> > >> >
> > >> > GEODE-4794 - [Sai]
> > >> > GEODE-5594 - [Sai]
> > >> >
> > >> > Regards
> > >> > Nabarun Nag
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:18 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Please continue using 1.7.0 as a fix version in JIRA till the email
> > >> comes
> > >> >> in that the 1.7.0 release branch has be cut.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Changing the fixed version for the following tickets to 1.7.0 from
> > >> 1.8.0
> > >> >> as these fixes will be included in the 1.7.0 release
> > >> >>
> > >> >> GEODE-5671
> > >> >> GEODE-5662
> > >> >> GEODE-5660
> > >> >> GEODE-5652
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Regards
> > >> >> Nabarun Nag
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:20 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> A new feature of get/set cluster config was added as new feature
> to
> > >> gfsh.
> > >> >>> This needs to be added to the documentation.
> > >> >>> Once this is done, the branch will be ready.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Regards
> > >> >>> Nabarun
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:15 PM Alexander Murmann <
> > >> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>> Nabarun, do you still see anything blocking cutting the release
> at
> > >> this
> > >> >>>> point?
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Maybe we can even get a pipeline going today? 😳
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> >>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
> > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>> We can go ahead and cut 1.7 with out GEODE-5338 as I don't have
> > the
> > >> >>>> code
> > >> >>>>> ready.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> GEODE-5594, adds a new flag to enable hostname validation and is
> > >> >>>> disabled
> > >> >>>>> by default so we are good with changes that are already merged
> and
> > >> >>>>> documentation for GEODE-5594 is ready merged.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> Naba, after the branch is cut we should delete windows jobs from
> > the
> > >> >>>> branch
> > >> >>>>> before we create the pipeline for 1.7.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> Apologies for holding up the release.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> Sai.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, 10:23 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> I am waiting on the documentation tickets to get closed before
> > >> >>>> cutting
> > >> >>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>> branch.
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> Regards
> > >> >>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:18 AM Anthony Baker <
> > abaker@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> Perhaps we should cut 1.7.0 without these changes to give us
> > more
> > >> >>>> time
> > >> >>>>> to
> > >> >>>>>>> review and complete the work.
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> Thoughts?
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> Anthony
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> On Aug 31, 2018, at 8:03 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> >>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> I haven't yet merged GEODE-5338. The PR changes the existing
> > >> >>>> behavior
> > >> >>>>>> and
> > >> >>>>>>>> is not acceptable.
> > >> >>>>>>>> Working on changing the implementation to have a default
> value
> > >> >>>>> derived
> > >> >>>>>>>> based on how user
> > >> >>>>>>>> wants to configure SSL.
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:45 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> >>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> > >> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> I have merged GEODE-5594 to develop.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is now waiting for PR review and precheckin.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> >>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is downvoted for the security concerns related
> to
> > >> >>>>> trusting
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> the default trust store and thus resulted in an improvement
> > to
> > >> >>>> add
> > >> >>>>> a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> hostname
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> validation as a feature before we can support trusting
> > default
> > >> >>>>> trust
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> store.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> So GEODE-5338 is blocked by GEODE-5594.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> Once I merge GEODE-5594, I will reinitiate review on
> > >> >>>> GEODE-5338 PR.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexander Murmann <
> > >> >>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Looks like we are now waiting for these tickets:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 which is a dup of GEODE-5590 which has this
> open
> > >> >>>> PR:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2368.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5594 has open PR:
> > >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 <
> > >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346GEODE-5338>
> > >> >>>>>> has
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2244.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Does this look right?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The GEODE-5338 ticket is the most concerning to me right
> > now.
> > >> >>>> The
> > >> >>>>> PR
> > >> >>>>>>> was
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> down voted, had some down voted discussion and nothing
> > since.
> > >> >>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> mentioned
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> yesterday that this might be able to merge. That's
> > surprising
> > >> >>>>> given
> > >> >>>>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> downvotes and lack of discussion. Sai, do you want to give
> > us
> > >> >>>> a
> > >> >>>>>>> update,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> maybe on the PR?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Juan José Ramos <
> > >> >>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!!
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:13 AM Nabarun Nag <
> > nnag@apache.org
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Juan,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5618 as PR#2360 has been merged in to develop. The
> > new
> > >> >>>>>> branch
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> has
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> not
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> yet been created hence this fix will be in 1.7.0
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM Juan José Ramos <
> > >> >>>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello team,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we also include GEODE-5618 in the next release?.
> The
> > >> >>>> pull
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> request
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> has
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been approved already, it just needs to be merged.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:45 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great!  thanks
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 1:42 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I completely agree. Once the branch is created, it
> will
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> undergo all
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility and upgrade tests.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit that you have mentioned will be reverted
> in
> > >> >>>> 1.7.0,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> as
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> well
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any related commits
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's as easy as doing a rebase.
> Someone
> > >> >>>> added
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version to Version.java and we need to revert that.
> > We
> > >> >>>> also
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> need
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> see
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if it's being used anywhere for
> > >> >>>> backward-compatibility.  If
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> it's
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> in
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those changes need to be examined and probably
> undone
> > >> >>>> on the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> if
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they're targeting 1.7 peers/clients.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 12:11 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Bruce those changes were done when 1.7.0 release
> > >> >>>> process
> > >> >>>>> was
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in-progress,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a release branch was already created. But we
> > >> >>>> stopped
> > >> >>>>> that
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> process
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mid
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way. This happened in May 2018.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are planning to rebase the 1.7.0 brach with the
> > >> >>>> current
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> develop
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we've cut a 1.7.0 release branch
> that
> > >> >>>> says
> > >> >>>>> its
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8.0.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that intentional?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private static final byte GEODE_180_ORDINAL =95;
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public static final VersionGEODE_180 =
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      new Version("GEODE","1.8.0", (byte)1,
> (byte)8,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,GEODE_180_ORDINAL);
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 9:50 AM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After reading through the weekend, validating
> > >> >>>> against CN
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> as a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback should be acceptable and dont have any
> > >> >>>> further
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> concerns
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with default JDK's implementation as
> expressed[1].
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Planning to merge GEODE-5594 today and following
> > with
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/906540e18fa6f85fc77c88c28fc74a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 61402471d2eed4ee9dab4813c9@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding GEODE-5594, though the current
> > >> >>>> implementation
> > >> >>>>> is
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> good
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more coverage.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While adding tests to cover negative cases, I
> > found
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> something
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK's
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> default implementation of
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hostname validation which I am not happy about
> and
> > >> >>>> so it
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> needs a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rethought. It could result in
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementing our own custom algorithm to do
> > hostname
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> validation.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will send out details and seek to advise on
> what
> > >> >>>> we
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> should
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> do
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different thread.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:52 AM Alexander
> > Murmann <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To summarize where we are right now in this
> > >> >>>> discussion,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I see
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tickets listed in this thread as want-to-haves
> > for
> > >> >>>> 1.7:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5615 - ✅ resolved
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5601 - 🏃‍♀️ in progress
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5594 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5338 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5619 - 🙄 in progress in JIRA but
> has
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> merged
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> PR.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     mean?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that needs to go into
> 1.7?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems like the best we all can do is to
> review
> > >> >>>> Sai's
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> PRs.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Jens Deppe <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jdeppe@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to include GEODE-5619
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:59 PM Xiaojian Zhou
> <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> gzhou@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release will be a great one with so many
> > >> >>>>> historical
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> bugs
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today I tried to use IJ to build and run with
> > >> >>>> latest
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> build.gradle
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent moved test packages, it worked. So
> this
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> refactoring
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Anthony
> Baker
> > <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abaker@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I most definitely agree!
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Dan Smith <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> dsmith@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we do want to wait for GEODE-5615
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> (DistributedTest
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OOMEs)
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 (AcceptanceTest port conflicts)
> to
> > >> >>>> be
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> fixed
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> before
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new 1.7 branch. It would be better if we
> > don't
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> create a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a point where we have these systematic
> issues
> > >> >>>> with
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> our
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pipeline.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> >>>>>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> >>>>>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269
> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> >>>>>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
> > >> >>>> 16:00
> > >> >>>>> GMT
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
> > >> >>>>> twitter]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
> > >> >>>> facebook]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image:
> > google
> > >> >>>>> plus]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> > >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
> > 16:00
> > >> >>>> GMT
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
> > >> >>>> twitter]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
> > facebook]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image:
> google
> > >> >>>> plus]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> > >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Geode 1.7.0 release branch created

[Dan Smith <ds...@pivotal.io>]

Why is it waiting at all in this case? Where is this 2 minute timeout
coming from?

-Dan

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:12 PM, Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> So the issue is that it takes longer to start than previous releases?
> Also, is this wait time only when using Gfsh to create gateway-receiver?
>
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:03 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Currently we have a minor issue in the release branch as pointed out by
> > Barry O.
> > We will wait till a resolution is figured out for this issue.
> >
> > Steps:
> > 1. create locator
> > 2. start server --name=server1 --server-port=40404
> > 3. start server --name=server2 --server-port=40405
> > 4. create gateway-receiver --member=server1
> > 5. create gateway-receiver --member=server2 `This gets stuck for 2
> minutes`
> >
> > Is the 2 minute wait time acceptable? Should we document it? When we
> revert
> > GEODE-5591, this issue does not happen.
> >
> > Regards
> > Nabarun Nag
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:50 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Status Update on release process for 1.7.0
> > > - checkPom files are being modified to have version as 1.7.0 instead of
> > > 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
> > > - gradle.properties file has been modified to reflect 1.7.0 as the
> > version.
> > > - Version.java has been reverted to remove all changes corresponding to
> > > 1.8.0
> > > - CommandInitializer.java has been reverted to remove changes for 1.8.0
> > > - LuceneIndexCommandsJUnitTest.java has been modified to change
> > > Version.GEODE_180 to GEODE_170
> > > - LuceneIndexCommands.java has been modified to change
> Version.GEODE_180
> > > to GEODE_170
> > > -TXCommitMessage.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180 to
> > > GEODE_170
> > >
> > > I will be getting in touch with the individual developers to verify my
> > > changes.
> > > The branch will be update once we get a green light on these changes.
> > >
> > > Still need updates on these tickets:
> > >
> > > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> > > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> > > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> > > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
> > >
> > > These tickets have commits into develop but they are still open with
> fix
> > > version as 1.8.0
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Nabarun Nag
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:38 PM Dale Emery <de...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I have resolved GEODE-5254
> > >>
> > >> Dale
> > >>
> > >> > On Aug 31, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Nabarun Nag <nn...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Requesting status update on the following JIRA tickets. These
> tickets
> > >> have
> > >> > commits into develop against its name but the status is still open /
> > >> > unresolved.
> > >> >
> > >> > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> > >> > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> > >> > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> > >> > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
> > >> > GEODE-5254 - [Dale Emery]
> > >> >
> > >> > GEODE-4794 - [Sai]
> > >> > GEODE-5594 - [Sai]
> > >> >
> > >> > Regards
> > >> > Nabarun Nag
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:18 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Please continue using 1.7.0 as a fix version in JIRA till the email
> > >> comes
> > >> >> in that the 1.7.0 release branch has be cut.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Changing the fixed version for the following tickets to 1.7.0 from
> > >> 1.8.0
> > >> >> as these fixes will be included in the 1.7.0 release
> > >> >>
> > >> >> GEODE-5671
> > >> >> GEODE-5662
> > >> >> GEODE-5660
> > >> >> GEODE-5652
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Regards
> > >> >> Nabarun Nag
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:20 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> A new feature of get/set cluster config was added as new feature
> to
> > >> gfsh.
> > >> >>> This needs to be added to the documentation.
> > >> >>> Once this is done, the branch will be ready.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Regards
> > >> >>> Nabarun
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:15 PM Alexander Murmann <
> > >> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>> Nabarun, do you still see anything blocking cutting the release
> at
> > >> this
> > >> >>>> point?
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> Maybe we can even get a pipeline going today? 😳
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> >>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
> > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>> We can go ahead and cut 1.7 with out GEODE-5338 as I don't have
> > the
> > >> >>>> code
> > >> >>>>> ready.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> GEODE-5594, adds a new flag to enable hostname validation and is
> > >> >>>> disabled
> > >> >>>>> by default so we are good with changes that are already merged
> and
> > >> >>>>> documentation for GEODE-5594 is ready merged.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> Naba, after the branch is cut we should delete windows jobs from
> > the
> > >> >>>> branch
> > >> >>>>> before we create the pipeline for 1.7.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> Apologies for holding up the release.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> Sai.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, 10:23 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> I am waiting on the documentation tickets to get closed before
> > >> >>>> cutting
> > >> >>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>> branch.
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> Regards
> > >> >>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:18 AM Anthony Baker <
> > abaker@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> Perhaps we should cut 1.7.0 without these changes to give us
> > more
> > >> >>>> time
> > >> >>>>> to
> > >> >>>>>>> review and complete the work.
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> Thoughts?
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> Anthony
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> On Aug 31, 2018, at 8:03 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> >>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> I haven't yet merged GEODE-5338. The PR changes the existing
> > >> >>>> behavior
> > >> >>>>>> and
> > >> >>>>>>>> is not acceptable.
> > >> >>>>>>>> Working on changing the implementation to have a default
> value
> > >> >>>>> derived
> > >> >>>>>>>> based on how user
> > >> >>>>>>>> wants to configure SSL.
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:45 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> >>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> > >> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> I have merged GEODE-5594 to develop.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is now waiting for PR review and precheckin.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> >>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is downvoted for the security concerns related
> to
> > >> >>>>> trusting
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> the default trust store and thus resulted in an improvement
> > to
> > >> >>>> add
> > >> >>>>> a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> hostname
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> validation as a feature before we can support trusting
> > default
> > >> >>>>> trust
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> store.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> So GEODE-5338 is blocked by GEODE-5594.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> Once I merge GEODE-5594, I will reinitiate review on
> > >> >>>> GEODE-5338 PR.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexander Murmann <
> > >> >>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Looks like we are now waiting for these tickets:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 which is a dup of GEODE-5590 which has this
> open
> > >> >>>> PR:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2368.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5594 has open PR:
> > >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 <
> > >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346GEODE-5338>
> > >> >>>>>> has
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2244.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Does this look right?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> The GEODE-5338 ticket is the most concerning to me right
> > now.
> > >> >>>> The
> > >> >>>>> PR
> > >> >>>>>>> was
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> down voted, had some down voted discussion and nothing
> > since.
> > >> >>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> mentioned
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> yesterday that this might be able to merge. That's
> > surprising
> > >> >>>>> given
> > >> >>>>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> downvotes and lack of discussion. Sai, do you want to give
> > us
> > >> >>>> a
> > >> >>>>>>> update,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> maybe on the PR?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Juan José Ramos <
> > >> >>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!!
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:13 AM Nabarun Nag <
> > nnag@apache.org
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Juan,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5618 as PR#2360 has been merged in to develop. The
> > new
> > >> >>>>>> branch
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> has
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> not
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> yet been created hence this fix will be in 1.7.0
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM Juan José Ramos <
> > >> >>>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello team,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we also include GEODE-5618 in the next release?.
> The
> > >> >>>> pull
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> request
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> has
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been approved already, it just needs to be merged.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:45 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great!  thanks
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 1:42 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I completely agree. Once the branch is created, it
> will
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> undergo all
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility and upgrade tests.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit that you have mentioned will be reverted
> in
> > >> >>>> 1.7.0,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> as
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> well
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any related commits
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's as easy as doing a rebase.
> Someone
> > >> >>>> added
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version to Version.java and we need to revert that.
> > We
> > >> >>>> also
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> need
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> see
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if it's being used anywhere for
> > >> >>>> backward-compatibility.  If
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> it's
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> in
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those changes need to be examined and probably
> undone
> > >> >>>> on the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> if
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they're targeting 1.7 peers/clients.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 12:11 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Bruce those changes were done when 1.7.0 release
> > >> >>>> process
> > >> >>>>> was
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in-progress,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a release branch was already created. But we
> > >> >>>> stopped
> > >> >>>>> that
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> process
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mid
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way. This happened in May 2018.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are planning to rebase the 1.7.0 brach with the
> > >> >>>> current
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> develop
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we've cut a 1.7.0 release branch
> that
> > >> >>>> says
> > >> >>>>> its
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8.0.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that intentional?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private static final byte GEODE_180_ORDINAL =95;
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public static final VersionGEODE_180 =
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      new Version("GEODE","1.8.0", (byte)1,
> (byte)8,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,GEODE_180_ORDINAL);
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 9:50 AM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After reading through the weekend, validating
> > >> >>>> against CN
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> as a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback should be acceptable and dont have any
> > >> >>>> further
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> concerns
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with default JDK's implementation as
> expressed[1].
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Planning to merge GEODE-5594 today and following
> > with
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/906540e18fa6f85fc77c88c28fc74a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 61402471d2eed4ee9dab4813c9@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding GEODE-5594, though the current
> > >> >>>> implementation
> > >> >>>>> is
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> good
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more coverage.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While adding tests to cover negative cases, I
> > found
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> something
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK's
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> default implementation of
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hostname validation which I am not happy about
> and
> > >> >>>> so it
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> needs a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rethought. It could result in
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementing our own custom algorithm to do
> > hostname
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> validation.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will send out details and seek to advise on
> what
> > >> >>>> we
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> should
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> do
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different thread.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:52 AM Alexander
> > Murmann <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To summarize where we are right now in this
> > >> >>>> discussion,
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I see
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tickets listed in this thread as want-to-haves
> > for
> > >> >>>> 1.7:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5615 - ✅ resolved
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5601 - 🏃‍♀️ in progress
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5594 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5338 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5619 - 🙄 in progress in JIRA but
> has
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> merged
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> PR.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     mean?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that needs to go into
> 1.7?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems like the best we all can do is to
> review
> > >> >>>> Sai's
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> PRs.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct?
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Jens Deppe <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jdeppe@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to include GEODE-5619
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:59 PM Xiaojian Zhou
> <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> gzhou@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release will be a great one with so many
> > >> >>>>> historical
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> bugs
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today I tried to use IJ to build and run with
> > >> >>>> latest
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> build.gradle
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent moved test packages, it worked. So
> this
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> refactoring
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Anthony
> Baker
> > <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abaker@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I most definitely agree!
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Dan Smith <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> dsmith@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we do want to wait for GEODE-5615
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> (DistributedTest
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OOMEs)
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 (AcceptanceTest port conflicts)
> to
> > >> >>>> be
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> fixed
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> before
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new 1.7 branch. It would be better if we
> > don't
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> create a
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a point where we have these systematic
> issues
> > >> >>>> with
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> our
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pipeline.
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> >>>>>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> >>>>>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269
> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> >>>>>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
> > >> >>>> 16:00
> > >> >>>>> GMT
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
> > >> >>>>> twitter]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
> > >> >>>> facebook]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image:
> > google
> > >> >>>>> plus]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> > >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
> > 16:00
> > >> >>>> GMT
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
> > >> >>>> twitter]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
> > facebook]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image:
> google
> > >> >>>> plus]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> > >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Geode 1.7.0 release branch created

[Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@gmail.com>]

So the issue is that it takes longer to start than previous releases?
Also, is this wait time only when using Gfsh to create gateway-receiver?

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:03 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:

> Currently we have a minor issue in the release branch as pointed out by
> Barry O.
> We will wait till a resolution is figured out for this issue.
>
> Steps:
> 1. create locator
> 2. start server --name=server1 --server-port=40404
> 3. start server --name=server2 --server-port=40405
> 4. create gateway-receiver --member=server1
> 5. create gateway-receiver --member=server2 `This gets stuck for 2 minutes`
>
> Is the 2 minute wait time acceptable? Should we document it? When we revert
> GEODE-5591, this issue does not happen.
>
> Regards
> Nabarun Nag
>
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:50 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Status Update on release process for 1.7.0
> > - checkPom files are being modified to have version as 1.7.0 instead of
> > 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
> > - gradle.properties file has been modified to reflect 1.7.0 as the
> version.
> > - Version.java has been reverted to remove all changes corresponding to
> > 1.8.0
> > - CommandInitializer.java has been reverted to remove changes for 1.8.0
> > - LuceneIndexCommandsJUnitTest.java has been modified to change
> > Version.GEODE_180 to GEODE_170
> > - LuceneIndexCommands.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180
> > to GEODE_170
> > -TXCommitMessage.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180 to
> > GEODE_170
> >
> > I will be getting in touch with the individual developers to verify my
> > changes.
> > The branch will be update once we get a green light on these changes.
> >
> > Still need updates on these tickets:
> >
> > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
> >
> > These tickets have commits into develop but they are still open with fix
> > version as 1.8.0
> >
> > Regards
> > Nabarun Nag
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:38 PM Dale Emery <de...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> >> I have resolved GEODE-5254
> >>
> >> Dale
> >>
> >> > On Aug 31, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Nabarun Nag <nn...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Requesting status update on the following JIRA tickets. These tickets
> >> have
> >> > commits into develop against its name but the status is still open /
> >> > unresolved.
> >> >
> >> > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> >> > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> >> > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> >> > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
> >> > GEODE-5254 - [Dale Emery]
> >> >
> >> > GEODE-4794 - [Sai]
> >> > GEODE-5594 - [Sai]
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> > Nabarun Nag
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:18 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Please continue using 1.7.0 as a fix version in JIRA till the email
> >> comes
> >> >> in that the 1.7.0 release branch has be cut.
> >> >>
> >> >> Changing the fixed version for the following tickets to 1.7.0 from
> >> 1.8.0
> >> >> as these fixes will be included in the 1.7.0 release
> >> >>
> >> >> GEODE-5671
> >> >> GEODE-5662
> >> >> GEODE-5660
> >> >> GEODE-5652
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards
> >> >> Nabarun Nag
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:20 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> A new feature of get/set cluster config was added as new feature to
> >> gfsh.
> >> >>> This needs to be added to the documentation.
> >> >>> Once this is done, the branch will be ready.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Regards
> >> >>> Nabarun
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:15 PM Alexander Murmann <
> >> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Nabarun, do you still see anything blocking cutting the release at
> >> this
> >> >>>> point?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Maybe we can even get a pipeline going today? 😳
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> >> >>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
> >> >>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> We can go ahead and cut 1.7 with out GEODE-5338 as I don't have
> the
> >> >>>> code
> >> >>>>> ready.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> GEODE-5594, adds a new flag to enable hostname validation and is
> >> >>>> disabled
> >> >>>>> by default so we are good with changes that are already merged and
> >> >>>>> documentation for GEODE-5594 is ready merged.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Naba, after the branch is cut we should delete windows jobs from
> the
> >> >>>> branch
> >> >>>>> before we create the pipeline for 1.7.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Apologies for holding up the release.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Sai.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, 10:23 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> I am waiting on the documentation tickets to get closed before
> >> >>>> cutting
> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>>>>> branch.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Regards
> >> >>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:18 AM Anthony Baker <
> abaker@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Perhaps we should cut 1.7.0 without these changes to give us
> more
> >> >>>> time
> >> >>>>> to
> >> >>>>>>> review and complete the work.
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Thoughts?
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Anthony
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> On Aug 31, 2018, at 8:03 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> >> >>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> I haven't yet merged GEODE-5338. The PR changes the existing
> >> >>>> behavior
> >> >>>>>> and
> >> >>>>>>>> is not acceptable.
> >> >>>>>>>> Working on changing the implementation to have a default value
> >> >>>>> derived
> >> >>>>>>>> based on how user
> >> >>>>>>>> wants to configure SSL.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:45 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> >> >>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> I have merged GEODE-5594 to develop.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is now waiting for PR review and precheckin.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> >> >>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is downvoted for the security concerns related to
> >> >>>>> trusting
> >> >>>>>>>>>> the default trust store and thus resulted in an improvement
> to
> >> >>>> add
> >> >>>>> a
> >> >>>>>>>>>> hostname
> >> >>>>>>>>>> validation as a feature before we can support trusting
> default
> >> >>>>> trust
> >> >>>>>>>>>> store.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> So GEODE-5338 is blocked by GEODE-5594.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> Once I merge GEODE-5594, I will reinitiate review on
> >> >>>> GEODE-5338 PR.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexander Murmann <
> >> >>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Looks like we are now waiting for these tickets:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 which is a dup of GEODE-5590 which has this open
> >> >>>> PR:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2368.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5594 has open PR:
> >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 <
> >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346GEODE-5338>
> >> >>>>>> has
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2244.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Does this look right?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> The GEODE-5338 ticket is the most concerning to me right
> now.
> >> >>>> The
> >> >>>>> PR
> >> >>>>>>> was
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> down voted, had some down voted discussion and nothing
> since.
> >> >>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> mentioned
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> yesterday that this might be able to merge. That's
> surprising
> >> >>>>> given
> >> >>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> downvotes and lack of discussion. Sai, do you want to give
> us
> >> >>>> a
> >> >>>>>>> update,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> maybe on the PR?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Juan José Ramos <
> >> >>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!!
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:13 AM Nabarun Nag <
> nnag@apache.org
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Juan,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5618 as PR#2360 has been merged in to develop. The
> new
> >> >>>>>> branch
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> has
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> yet been created hence this fix will be in 1.7.0
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM Juan José Ramos <
> >> >>>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello team,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we also include GEODE-5618 in the next release?. The
> >> >>>> pull
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> request
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> has
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been approved already, it just needs to be merged.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:45 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great!  thanks
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 1:42 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I completely agree. Once the branch is created, it will
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> undergo all
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility and upgrade tests.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit that you have mentioned will be reverted in
> >> >>>> 1.7.0,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> as
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> well
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any related commits
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's as easy as doing a rebase.  Someone
> >> >>>> added
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version to Version.java and we need to revert that.
> We
> >> >>>> also
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> need
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> see
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if it's being used anywhere for
> >> >>>> backward-compatibility.  If
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> it's
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> in
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those changes need to be examined and probably undone
> >> >>>> on the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> if
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they're targeting 1.7 peers/clients.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 12:11 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Bruce those changes were done when 1.7.0 release
> >> >>>> process
> >> >>>>> was
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in-progress,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a release branch was already created. But we
> >> >>>> stopped
> >> >>>>> that
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> process
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mid
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way. This happened in May 2018.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are planning to rebase the 1.7.0 brach with the
> >> >>>> current
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> develop
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we've cut a 1.7.0 release branch that
> >> >>>> says
> >> >>>>> its
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8.0.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that intentional?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private static final byte GEODE_180_ORDINAL =95;
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public static final VersionGEODE_180 =
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      new Version("GEODE","1.8.0", (byte)1, (byte)8,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,GEODE_180_ORDINAL);
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 9:50 AM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After reading through the weekend, validating
> >> >>>> against CN
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> as a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback should be acceptable and dont have any
> >> >>>> further
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> concerns
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with default JDK's implementation as expressed[1].
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Planning to merge GEODE-5594 today and following
> with
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/906540e18fa6f85fc77c88c28fc74a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 61402471d2eed4ee9dab4813c9@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding GEODE-5594, though the current
> >> >>>> implementation
> >> >>>>> is
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> good
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more coverage.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While adding tests to cover negative cases, I
> found
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> something
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK's
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> default implementation of
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hostname validation which I am not happy about and
> >> >>>> so it
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> needs a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rethought. It could result in
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementing our own custom algorithm to do
> hostname
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> validation.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will send out details and seek to advise on what
> >> >>>> we
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> should
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> do
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different thread.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:52 AM Alexander
> Murmann <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To summarize where we are right now in this
> >> >>>> discussion,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> I see
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tickets listed in this thread as want-to-haves
> for
> >> >>>> 1.7:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5615 - ✅ resolved
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5601 - 🏃‍♀️ in progress
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5594 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5338 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5619 - 🙄 in progress in JIRA but has
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> merged
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> PR.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     mean?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that needs to go into 1.7?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems like the best we all can do is to review
> >> >>>> Sai's
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> PRs.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Jens Deppe <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jdeppe@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to include GEODE-5619
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:59 PM Xiaojian Zhou <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> gzhou@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release will be a great one with so many
> >> >>>>> historical
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> bugs
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today I tried to use IJ to build and run with
> >> >>>> latest
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> build.gradle
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent moved test packages, it worked. So this
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> refactoring
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Anthony Baker
> <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abaker@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I most definitely agree!
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Dan Smith <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> dsmith@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we do want to wait for GEODE-5615
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> (DistributedTest
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OOMEs)
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 (AcceptanceTest port conflicts) to
> >> >>>> be
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> fixed
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> before
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new 1.7 branch. It would be better if we
> don't
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> create a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a point where we have these systematic issues
> >> >>>> with
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> our
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pipeline.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> >>>>>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> >>>>>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> >>>>>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
> >> >>>> 16:00
> >> >>>>> GMT
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
> >> >>>>> twitter]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
> >> >>>> facebook]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image:
> google
> >> >>>>> plus]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
> 16:00
> >> >>>> GMT
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
> >> >>>> twitter]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
> facebook]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google
> >> >>>> plus]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >>
> >>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Geode 1.7.0 release branch created

[Sean Goller <sg...@pivotal.io>]

Reverting GEODE-5591 results in code that can produce an infinite loop, so
I don't feel that's a viable option. I feel as though the code treats bind
exceptions as transient occurrences, but my direct experience with them
leads me to the opposite conclusion. I don't believe a long wait time is
going to change the situation, especially since a TCP timeout scenario can
take up to 30 minutes to resolve itself. I believe it is better to fail
fast and hard, so I would suggest either failing immediately or a very
short timeout, say 5 or 10 seconds at most.

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 4:03 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:

> Currently we have a minor issue in the release branch as pointed out by
> Barry O.
> We will wait till a resolution is figured out for this issue.
>
> Steps:
> 1. create locator
> 2. start server --name=server1 --server-port=40404
> 3. start server --name=server2 --server-port=40405
> 4. create gateway-receiver --member=server1
> 5. create gateway-receiver --member=server2 `This gets stuck for 2 minutes`
>
> Is the 2 minute wait time acceptable? Should we document it? When we revert
> GEODE-5591, this issue does not happen.
>
> Regards
> Nabarun Nag
>
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:50 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Status Update on release process for 1.7.0
> > - checkPom files are being modified to have version as 1.7.0 instead of
> > 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
> > - gradle.properties file has been modified to reflect 1.7.0 as the
> version.
> > - Version.java has been reverted to remove all changes corresponding to
> > 1.8.0
> > - CommandInitializer.java has been reverted to remove changes for 1.8.0
> > - LuceneIndexCommandsJUnitTest.java has been modified to change
> > Version.GEODE_180 to GEODE_170
> > - LuceneIndexCommands.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180
> > to GEODE_170
> > -TXCommitMessage.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180 to
> > GEODE_170
> >
> > I will be getting in touch with the individual developers to verify my
> > changes.
> > The branch will be update once we get a green light on these changes.
> >
> > Still need updates on these tickets:
> >
> > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
> >
> > These tickets have commits into develop but they are still open with fix
> > version as 1.8.0
> >
> > Regards
> > Nabarun Nag
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:38 PM Dale Emery <de...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> >> I have resolved GEODE-5254
> >>
> >> Dale
> >>
> >> > On Aug 31, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Nabarun Nag <nn...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Requesting status update on the following JIRA tickets. These tickets
> >> have
> >> > commits into develop against its name but the status is still open /
> >> > unresolved.
> >> >
> >> > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> >> > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> >> > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> >> > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
> >> > GEODE-5254 - [Dale Emery]
> >> >
> >> > GEODE-4794 - [Sai]
> >> > GEODE-5594 - [Sai]
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> > Nabarun Nag
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:18 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Please continue using 1.7.0 as a fix version in JIRA till the email
> >> comes
> >> >> in that the 1.7.0 release branch has be cut.
> >> >>
> >> >> Changing the fixed version for the following tickets to 1.7.0 from
> >> 1.8.0
> >> >> as these fixes will be included in the 1.7.0 release
> >> >>
> >> >> GEODE-5671
> >> >> GEODE-5662
> >> >> GEODE-5660
> >> >> GEODE-5652
> >> >>
> >> >> Regards
> >> >> Nabarun Nag
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:20 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> A new feature of get/set cluster config was added as new feature to
> >> gfsh.
> >> >>> This needs to be added to the documentation.
> >> >>> Once this is done, the branch will be ready.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Regards
> >> >>> Nabarun
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:15 PM Alexander Murmann <
> >> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Nabarun, do you still see anything blocking cutting the release at
> >> this
> >> >>>> point?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Maybe we can even get a pipeline going today? 😳
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> >> >>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
> >> >>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> We can go ahead and cut 1.7 with out GEODE-5338 as I don't have
> the
> >> >>>> code
> >> >>>>> ready.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> GEODE-5594, adds a new flag to enable hostname validation and is
> >> >>>> disabled
> >> >>>>> by default so we are good with changes that are already merged and
> >> >>>>> documentation for GEODE-5594 is ready merged.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Naba, after the branch is cut we should delete windows jobs from
> the
> >> >>>> branch
> >> >>>>> before we create the pipeline for 1.7.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Apologies for holding up the release.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Sai.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, 10:23 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> I am waiting on the documentation tickets to get closed before
> >> >>>> cutting
> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>>>>> branch.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Regards
> >> >>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:18 AM Anthony Baker <
> abaker@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Perhaps we should cut 1.7.0 without these changes to give us
> more
> >> >>>> time
> >> >>>>> to
> >> >>>>>>> review and complete the work.
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Thoughts?
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> Anthony
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> On Aug 31, 2018, at 8:03 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
> >> >>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> I haven't yet merged GEODE-5338. The PR changes the existing
> >> >>>> behavior
> >> >>>>>> and
> >> >>>>>>>> is not acceptable.
> >> >>>>>>>> Working on changing the implementation to have a default value
> >> >>>>> derived
> >> >>>>>>>> based on how user
> >> >>>>>>>> wants to configure SSL.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:45 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> >> >>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> I have merged GEODE-5594 to develop.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is now waiting for PR review and precheckin.
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
> >> >>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is downvoted for the security concerns related to
> >> >>>>> trusting
> >> >>>>>>>>>> the default trust store and thus resulted in an improvement
> to
> >> >>>> add
> >> >>>>> a
> >> >>>>>>>>>> hostname
> >> >>>>>>>>>> validation as a feature before we can support trusting
> default
> >> >>>>> trust
> >> >>>>>>>>>> store.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> So GEODE-5338 is blocked by GEODE-5594.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> Once I merge GEODE-5594, I will reinitiate review on
> >> >>>> GEODE-5338 PR.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexander Murmann <
> >> >>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Looks like we are now waiting for these tickets:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 which is a dup of GEODE-5590 which has this open
> >> >>>> PR:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2368.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5594 has open PR:
> >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 <
> >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346GEODE-5338>
> >> >>>>>> has
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2244.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> Does this look right?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> The GEODE-5338 ticket is the most concerning to me right
> now.
> >> >>>> The
> >> >>>>> PR
> >> >>>>>>> was
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> down voted, had some down voted discussion and nothing
> since.
> >> >>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> mentioned
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> yesterday that this might be able to merge. That's
> surprising
> >> >>>>> given
> >> >>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> downvotes and lack of discussion. Sai, do you want to give
> us
> >> >>>> a
> >> >>>>>>> update,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> maybe on the PR?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Juan José Ramos <
> >> >>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!!
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:13 AM Nabarun Nag <
> nnag@apache.org
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Juan,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5618 as PR#2360 has been merged in to develop. The
> new
> >> >>>>>> branch
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> has
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> yet been created hence this fix will be in 1.7.0
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM Juan José Ramos <
> >> >>>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello team,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we also include GEODE-5618 in the next release?. The
> >> >>>> pull
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> request
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> has
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been approved already, it just needs to be merged.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:45 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great!  thanks
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 1:42 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I completely agree. Once the branch is created, it will
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> undergo all
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility and upgrade tests.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit that you have mentioned will be reverted in
> >> >>>> 1.7.0,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> as
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> well
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any related commits
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's as easy as doing a rebase.  Someone
> >> >>>> added
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version to Version.java and we need to revert that.
> We
> >> >>>> also
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> need
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> see
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if it's being used anywhere for
> >> >>>> backward-compatibility.  If
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> it's
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> in
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those changes need to be examined and probably undone
> >> >>>> on the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> if
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they're targeting 1.7 peers/clients.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 12:11 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Bruce those changes were done when 1.7.0 release
> >> >>>> process
> >> >>>>> was
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in-progress,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a release branch was already created. But we
> >> >>>> stopped
> >> >>>>> that
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> process
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mid
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way. This happened in May 2018.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are planning to rebase the 1.7.0 brach with the
> >> >>>> current
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> develop
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we've cut a 1.7.0 release branch that
> >> >>>> says
> >> >>>>> its
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8.0.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that intentional?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private static final byte GEODE_180_ORDINAL =95;
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public static final VersionGEODE_180 =
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      new Version("GEODE","1.8.0", (byte)1, (byte)8,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,GEODE_180_ORDINAL);
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 9:50 AM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After reading through the weekend, validating
> >> >>>> against CN
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> as a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback should be acceptable and dont have any
> >> >>>> further
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> concerns
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with default JDK's implementation as expressed[1].
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Planning to merge GEODE-5594 today and following
> with
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/906540e18fa6f85fc77c88c28fc74a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> 61402471d2eed4ee9dab4813c9@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding GEODE-5594, though the current
> >> >>>> implementation
> >> >>>>> is
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> good
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more coverage.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While adding tests to cover negative cases, I
> found
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> something
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK's
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> default implementation of
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hostname validation which I am not happy about and
> >> >>>> so it
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> needs a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rethought. It could result in
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementing our own custom algorithm to do
> hostname
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> validation.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will send out details and seek to advise on what
> >> >>>> we
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> should
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> do
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different thread.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:52 AM Alexander
> Murmann <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To summarize where we are right now in this
> >> >>>> discussion,
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> I see
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tickets listed in this thread as want-to-haves
> for
> >> >>>> 1.7:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5615 - ✅ resolved
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5601 - 🏃‍♀️ in progress
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5594 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5338 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5619 - 🙄 in progress in JIRA but has
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> merged
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> PR.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     mean?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that needs to go into 1.7?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems like the best we all can do is to review
> >> >>>> Sai's
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> PRs.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct?
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Jens Deppe <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jdeppe@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to include GEODE-5619
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:59 PM Xiaojian Zhou <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> gzhou@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release will be a great one with so many
> >> >>>>> historical
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> bugs
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today I tried to use IJ to build and run with
> >> >>>> latest
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> build.gradle
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent moved test packages, it worked. So this
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> refactoring
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Anthony Baker
> <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abaker@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I most definitely agree!
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Dan Smith <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> dsmith@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we do want to wait for GEODE-5615
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> (DistributedTest
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OOMEs)
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 (AcceptanceTest port conflicts) to
> >> >>>> be
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> fixed
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> before
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new 1.7 branch. It would be better if we
> don't
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> create a
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a point where we have these systematic issues
> >> >>>> with
> >> >>>>>>>>>>> our
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pipeline.
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> >>>>>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> >>>>>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> >>>>>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
> >> >>>> 16:00
> >> >>>>> GMT
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
> >> >>>>> twitter]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
> >> >>>> facebook]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image:
> google
> >> >>>>> plus]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
> 16:00
> >> >>>> GMT
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
> >> >>>> twitter]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
> facebook]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google
> >> >>>> plus]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
> >> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>
> >>
> >>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Geode 1.7.0 release branch created

[Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org>]

Currently we have a minor issue in the release branch as pointed out by
Barry O.
We will wait till a resolution is figured out for this issue.

Steps:
1. create locator
2. start server --name=server1 --server-port=40404
3. start server --name=server2 --server-port=40405
4. create gateway-receiver --member=server1
5. create gateway-receiver --member=server2 `This gets stuck for 2 minutes`

Is the 2 minute wait time acceptable? Should we document it? When we revert
GEODE-5591, this issue does not happen.

Regards
Nabarun Nag

On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:50 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:

> Status Update on release process for 1.7.0
> - checkPom files are being modified to have version as 1.7.0 instead of
> 1.8.0-SNAPSHOT
> - gradle.properties file has been modified to reflect 1.7.0 as the version.
> - Version.java has been reverted to remove all changes corresponding to
> 1.8.0
> - CommandInitializer.java has been reverted to remove changes for 1.8.0
> - LuceneIndexCommandsJUnitTest.java has been modified to change
> Version.GEODE_180 to GEODE_170
> - LuceneIndexCommands.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180
> to GEODE_170
> -TXCommitMessage.java has been modified to change Version.GEODE_180 to
> GEODE_170
>
> I will be getting in touch with the individual developers to verify my
> changes.
> The branch will be update once we get a green light on these changes.
>
> Still need updates on these tickets:
>
> GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
> GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
> GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
> GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
>
> These tickets have commits into develop but they are still open with fix
> version as 1.8.0
>
> Regards
> Nabarun Nag
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:38 PM Dale Emery <de...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> I have resolved GEODE-5254
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> > On Aug 31, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Nabarun Nag <nn...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>> >
>> > Requesting status update on the following JIRA tickets. These tickets
>> have
>> > commits into develop against its name but the status is still open /
>> > unresolved.
>> >
>> > GEODE-5600 - [Patrick Rhomberg]
>> > GEODE-5578 - [Robert Houghton]
>> > GEODE-5492 - [Robert Houghton]
>> > GEODE-5280 - [xiaojian zhou & Biju Kunjummen]
>> > GEODE-5254 - [Dale Emery]
>> >
>> > GEODE-4794 - [Sai]
>> > GEODE-5594 - [Sai]
>> >
>> > Regards
>> > Nabarun Nag
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 3:18 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Please continue using 1.7.0 as a fix version in JIRA till the email
>> comes
>> >> in that the 1.7.0 release branch has be cut.
>> >>
>> >> Changing the fixed version for the following tickets to 1.7.0 from
>> 1.8.0
>> >> as these fixes will be included in the 1.7.0 release
>> >>
>> >> GEODE-5671
>> >> GEODE-5662
>> >> GEODE-5660
>> >> GEODE-5652
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >> Nabarun Nag
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:20 PM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> A new feature of get/set cluster config was added as new feature to
>> gfsh.
>> >>> This needs to be added to the documentation.
>> >>> Once this is done, the branch will be ready.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards
>> >>> Nabarun
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:15 PM Alexander Murmann <
>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Nabarun, do you still see anything blocking cutting the release at
>> this
>> >>>> point?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Maybe we can even get a pipeline going today? 😳
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
>> >>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> We can go ahead and cut 1.7 with out GEODE-5338 as I don't have the
>> >>>> code
>> >>>>> ready.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> GEODE-5594, adds a new flag to enable hostname validation and is
>> >>>> disabled
>> >>>>> by default so we are good with changes that are already merged and
>> >>>>> documentation for GEODE-5594 is ready merged.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Naba, after the branch is cut we should delete windows jobs from the
>> >>>> branch
>> >>>>> before we create the pipeline for 1.7.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Apologies for holding up the release.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Sai.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018, 10:23 AM Nabarun Nag <nn...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> I am waiting on the documentation tickets to get closed before
>> >>>> cutting
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>>> branch.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Regards
>> >>>>>> Nabarun Nag
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:18 AM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Perhaps we should cut 1.7.0 without these changes to give us more
>> >>>> time
>> >>>>> to
>> >>>>>>> review and complete the work.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Thoughts?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Anthony
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Aug 31, 2018, at 8:03 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <
>> >>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> I haven't yet merged GEODE-5338. The PR changes the existing
>> >>>> behavior
>> >>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>> is not acceptable.
>> >>>>>>>> Working on changing the implementation to have a default value
>> >>>>> derived
>> >>>>>>>> based on how user
>> >>>>>>>> wants to configure SSL.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Sai
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:45 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
>> >>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I have merged GEODE-5594 to develop.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is now waiting for PR review and precheckin.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Sai
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sai Boorlagadda <
>> >>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 is downvoted for the security concerns related to
>> >>>>> trusting
>> >>>>>>>>>> the default trust store and thus resulted in an improvement to
>> >>>> add
>> >>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>>>> hostname
>> >>>>>>>>>> validation as a feature before we can support trusting default
>> >>>>> trust
>> >>>>>>>>>> store.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> So GEODE-5338 is blocked by GEODE-5594.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Once I merge GEODE-5594, I will reinitiate review on
>> >>>> GEODE-5338 PR.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Sai
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexander Murmann <
>> >>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Looks like we are now waiting for these tickets:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 which is a dup of GEODE-5590 which has this open
>> >>>> PR:
>> >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2368.
>> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5594 has open PR:
>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346
>> >>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338 <
>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346GEODE-5338>
>> >>>>>> has
>> >>>>>>>>>>> open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2244.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Does this look right?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> The GEODE-5338 ticket is the most concerning to me right now.
>> >>>> The
>> >>>>> PR
>> >>>>>>> was
>> >>>>>>>>>>> down voted, had some down voted discussion and nothing since.
>> >>>> Sai
>> >>>>>>>>>>> mentioned
>> >>>>>>>>>>> yesterday that this might be able to merge. That's surprising
>> >>>>> given
>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>> downvotes and lack of discussion. Sai, do you want to give us
>> >>>> a
>> >>>>>>> update,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> maybe on the PR?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Juan José Ramos <
>> >>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!!
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:13 AM Nabarun Nag <nnag@apache.org
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Juan,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5618 as PR#2360 has been merged in to develop. The new
>> >>>>>> branch
>> >>>>>>>>>>> has
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> not
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> yet been created hence this fix will be in 1.7.0
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM Juan José Ramos <
>> >>>>>> jramos@pivotal.io
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello team,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can we also include GEODE-5618 in the next release?. The
>> >>>> pull
>> >>>>>>>>>>> request
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> has
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> been approved already, it just needs to be merged.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:45 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> great!  thanks
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 1:42 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I completely agree. Once the branch is created, it will
>> >>>>>>>>>>> undergo all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> compatibility and upgrade tests.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The commit that you have mentioned will be reverted in
>> >>>> 1.7.0,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> well
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any related commits
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's as easy as doing a rebase.  Someone
>> >>>> added
>> >>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> version to Version.java and we need to revert that.  We
>> >>>> also
>> >>>>>>>>>>> need
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> see
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> if it's being used anywhere for
>> >>>> backward-compatibility.  If
>> >>>>>>>>>>> it's
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those changes need to be examined and probably undone
>> >>>> on the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> branch
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> if
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they're targeting 1.7 peers/clients.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 12:11 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Bruce those changes were done when 1.7.0 release
>> >>>> process
>> >>>>> was
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in-progress,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a release branch was already created. But we
>> >>>> stopped
>> >>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> process
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mid
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way. This happened in May 2018.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We are planning to rebase the 1.7.0 brach with the
>> >>>> current
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> develop
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we've cut a 1.7.0 release branch that
>> >>>> says
>> >>>>> its
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8.0.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that intentional?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> private static final byte GEODE_180_ORDINAL =95;
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> public static final VersionGEODE_180 =
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      new Version("GEODE","1.8.0", (byte)1, (byte)8,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,GEODE_180_ORDINAL);
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 9:50 AM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After reading through the weekend, validating
>> >>>> against CN
>> >>>>>>>>>>> as a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback should be acceptable and dont have any
>> >>>> further
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> concerns
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with default JDK's implementation as expressed[1].
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Planning to merge GEODE-5594 today and following with
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5338.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/906540e18fa6f85fc77c88c28fc74a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 61402471d2eed4ee9dab4813c9@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding GEODE-5594, though the current
>> >>>> implementation
>> >>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> good
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more coverage.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While adding tests to cover negative cases, I found
>> >>>>>>>>>>> something
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> about
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JDK's
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> default implementation of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hostname validation which I am not happy about and
>> >>>> so it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> needs a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rethought. It could result in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementing our own custom algorithm to do hostname
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> validation.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will send out details and seek to advise on what
>> >>>> we
>> >>>>>>>>>>> should
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> do
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different thread.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:52 AM Alexander Murmann <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To summarize where we are right now in this
>> >>>> discussion,
>> >>>>>>>>>>> I see
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tickets listed in this thread as want-to-haves for
>> >>>> 1.7:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5615 - ✅ resolved
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5601 - 🏃‍♀️ in progress
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5594 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5338 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     - GEODE-5619 - 🙄 in progress in JIRA but has
>> >>>>>>>>>>> merged
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> PR.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     mean?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that needs to go into 1.7?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems like the best we all can do is to review
>> >>>> Sai's
>> >>>>>>>>>>> PRs.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Jens Deppe <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> jdeppe@pivotal.io>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to include GEODE-5619
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:59 PM Xiaojian Zhou <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> gzhou@pivotal.io
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release will be a great one with so many
>> >>>>> historical
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> bugs
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixed.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today I tried to use IJ to build and run with
>> >>>> latest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> build.gradle
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent moved test packages, it worked. So this
>> >>>>>>>>>>> refactoring
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Anthony Baker <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> abaker@pivotal.io>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I most definitely agree!
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Dan Smith <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> dsmith@pivotal.io>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we do want to wait for GEODE-5615
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> (DistributedTest
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OOMEs)
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 (AcceptanceTest port conflicts) to
>> >>>> be
>> >>>>>>>>>>> fixed
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> before
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new 1.7 branch. It would be better if we don't
>> >>>>>>>>>>> create a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a point where we have these systematic issues
>> >>>> with
>> >>>>>>>>>>> our
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pipeline.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> >>>>>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> >>>>>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269>
>> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> >>>>>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 -
>> >>>> 16:00
>> >>>>> GMT
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
>> >>>>> twitter]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image:
>> >>>> facebook]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google
>> >>>>> plus]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
>> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Email: jramos@pivotal.io
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> >>>> <+353%2021%20423%208611>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> >>>> <+353%2087%20207%204066>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269>
>> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> >>>> <(877)%20477-2269>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 - 16:00
>> >>>> GMT
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to upload artifacts:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image:
>> >>>> twitter]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image: facebook]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google
>> >>>> plus]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_
>> >>>>> eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>>
>>