You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geode.apache.org by Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io> on 2018/11/01 17:00:35 UTC
[DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Hi everyone,
It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to time based
releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not be cut as
soon as possible?
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Jason Huynh <jh...@pivotal.io>.
I also think that the PR https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2818, or
something that fixes this race, should make it into the release
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 8:59 AM Jason Huynh <jh...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> I just merged a change last night for GEODE-5884 that I think should make
> it into the release.
>
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 10:33 AM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> I’m working on a review of LICENSE and NOTICE. Looks like a few things
>> slipped in that need to be declared.
>>
>> Anthony
>>
>>
>> > On Nov 2, 2018, at 12:42 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Fixes for PRClientServerRegionFunctionExecutionDUnitTest and
>> CreateAsyncEventQueueCommandDUnitTest have been pushed to develop.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 11/2/18 11:05 AM, Alexander Murmann wrote:
>> >> Hi Ryan,
>> >>
>> >> I am currently waiting for the failing DUnit tests to pass and then
>> plan to
>> >> cut the release branch. Does it work for you if the fixes for
>> GEODE-5972
>> >> would be merged to the branch after it has been cut?
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:57 AM Ryan McMahon <rm...@pivotal.io>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Bill Burcham and I have been working on a data inconsistency issue
>> which
>> >>> involves a lost event across WAN sites during rebalance on the
>> originating
>> >>> site. We are currently performing root cause analysis. Below is a
>> Geode
>> >>> ticket which we will update with more details as we learn more.
>> >>>
>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-5972
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:23 PM Ernest Burghardt <
>> eburghardt@pivotal.io>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> and PR 390 has been approved and merged
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:10 PM Ernest Burghardt <
>> eburghardt@pivotal.io>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> geode-native fixes are in
>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/390
>> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 4:06 PM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>>> The geode-native source headers I mentioned in [1] need to be
>> cleaned
>> >>>> up.
>> >>>>>> Anthony
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> [1]
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8c9da19d7c0ef0149b1ed79bf0cecde38f17a854ecfa0f0a42f1ff0b@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
>> >>>>>>> On Nov 1, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <
>> >>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> This PR has been merged to develop
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 11/1/18 1:35 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> I would like to get this PR in the release:
>> >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757
>> >>>>>>>> I'm testing the merge to develop now
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
>> >>>>>>>>> critical issue.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to
>> >>>>>> develop.
>> >>>>>>>>> Sai
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <
>> >>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we
>> >>> should
>> >>>>>> only
>> >>>>>>>>>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some
>> >>> reason
>> >>>>>> (not
>> >>>>>>>>>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch
>> has
>> >>>>>> been cut.
>> >>>>>>>>>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are
>> >>> trying
>> >>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
>> >>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting
>> >>> for
>> >>>>>>>>>>> doc update.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Sai
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <
>> >>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to
>> >>> time
>> >>>>>> based
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should
>> not
>> >>>> be
>> >>>>>> cut
>> >>>>>>>>>> as
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> soon as possible?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >
>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Jason Huynh <jh...@pivotal.io>.
I just merged a change last night for GEODE-5884 that I think should make
it into the release.
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 10:33 AM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> I’m working on a review of LICENSE and NOTICE. Looks like a few things
> slipped in that need to be declared.
>
> Anthony
>
>
> > On Nov 2, 2018, at 12:42 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
> >
> > Fixes for PRClientServerRegionFunctionExecutionDUnitTest and
> CreateAsyncEventQueueCommandDUnitTest have been pushed to develop.
> >
> >
> > On 11/2/18 11:05 AM, Alexander Murmann wrote:
> >> Hi Ryan,
> >>
> >> I am currently waiting for the failing DUnit tests to pass and then
> plan to
> >> cut the release branch. Does it work for you if the fixes for GEODE-5972
> >> would be merged to the branch after it has been cut?
> >>
> >> On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:57 AM Ryan McMahon <rm...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Bill Burcham and I have been working on a data inconsistency issue
> which
> >>> involves a lost event across WAN sites during rebalance on the
> originating
> >>> site. We are currently performing root cause analysis. Below is a
> Geode
> >>> ticket which we will update with more details as we learn more.
> >>>
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-5972
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:23 PM Ernest Burghardt <eburghardt@pivotal.io
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> and PR 390 has been approved and merged
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:10 PM Ernest Burghardt <
> eburghardt@pivotal.io>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> geode-native fixes are in
> >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/390
> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 4:06 PM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>> The geode-native source headers I mentioned in [1] need to be
> cleaned
> >>>> up.
> >>>>>> Anthony
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>>
> >>>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8c9da19d7c0ef0149b1ed79bf0cecde38f17a854ecfa0f0a42f1ff0b@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
> >>>>>>> On Nov 1, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <
> >>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>> This PR has been merged to develop
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 11/1/18 1:35 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
> >>>>>>>> I would like to get this PR in the release:
> >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757
> >>>>>>>> I'm testing the merge to develop now
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
> >>>>>>>>> critical issue.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to
> >>>>>> develop.
> >>>>>>>>> Sai
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <
> >>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we
> >>> should
> >>>>>> only
> >>>>>>>>>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some
> >>> reason
> >>>>>> (not
> >>>>>>>>>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has
> >>>>>> been cut.
> >>>>>>>>>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are
> >>> trying
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
> >>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting
> >>> for
> >>>>>>>>>>> doc update.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Sai
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <
> >>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to
> >>> time
> >>>>>> based
> >>>>>>>>>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should
> not
> >>>> be
> >>>>>> cut
> >>>>>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>> soon as possible?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>.
I’m working on a review of LICENSE and NOTICE. Looks like a few things slipped in that need to be declared.
Anthony
> On Nov 2, 2018, at 12:42 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> Fixes for PRClientServerRegionFunctionExecutionDUnitTest and CreateAsyncEventQueueCommandDUnitTest have been pushed to develop.
>
>
> On 11/2/18 11:05 AM, Alexander Murmann wrote:
>> Hi Ryan,
>>
>> I am currently waiting for the failing DUnit tests to pass and then plan to
>> cut the release branch. Does it work for you if the fixes for GEODE-5972
>> would be merged to the branch after it has been cut?
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:57 AM Ryan McMahon <rm...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Bill Burcham and I have been working on a data inconsistency issue which
>>> involves a lost event across WAN sites during rebalance on the originating
>>> site. We are currently performing root cause analysis. Below is a Geode
>>> ticket which we will update with more details as we learn more.
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-5972
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:23 PM Ernest Burghardt <eb...@pivotal.io>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> and PR 390 has been approved and merged
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:10 PM Ernest Burghardt <eb...@pivotal.io>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> geode-native fixes are in
>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/390
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 4:06 PM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> The geode-native source headers I mentioned in [1] need to be cleaned
>>>> up.
>>>>>> Anthony
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8c9da19d7c0ef0149b1ed79bf0cecde38f17a854ecfa0f0a42f1ff0b@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
>>>>>>> On Nov 1, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <
>>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> This PR has been merged to develop
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/1/18 1:35 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
>>>>>>>> I would like to get this PR in the release:
>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757
>>>>>>>> I'm testing the merge to develop now
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
>>>>>>>>> critical issue.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to
>>>>>> develop.
>>>>>>>>> Sai
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <
>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we
>>> should
>>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some
>>> reason
>>>>>> (not
>>>>>>>>>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has
>>>>>> been cut.
>>>>>>>>>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are
>>> trying
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
>>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting
>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>> doc update.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Sai
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <
>>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to
>>> time
>>>>>> based
>>>>>>>>>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not
>>>> be
>>>>>> cut
>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>>> soon as possible?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io>.
Fixes for PRClientServerRegionFunctionExecutionDUnitTest and
CreateAsyncEventQueueCommandDUnitTest have been pushed to develop.
On 11/2/18 11:05 AM, Alexander Murmann wrote:
> Hi Ryan,
>
> I am currently waiting for the failing DUnit tests to pass and then plan to
> cut the release branch. Does it work for you if the fixes for GEODE-5972
> would be merged to the branch after it has been cut?
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:57 AM Ryan McMahon <rm...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> Bill Burcham and I have been working on a data inconsistency issue which
>> involves a lost event across WAN sites during rebalance on the originating
>> site. We are currently performing root cause analysis. Below is a Geode
>> ticket which we will update with more details as we learn more.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-5972
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:23 PM Ernest Burghardt <eb...@pivotal.io>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> and PR 390 has been approved and merged
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:10 PM Ernest Burghardt <eb...@pivotal.io>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> geode-native fixes are in
>>> https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/390
>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 4:06 PM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>
>> wrote:
>>>>> The geode-native source headers I mentioned in [1] need to be cleaned
>>> up.
>>>>> Anthony
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>>>>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8c9da19d7c0ef0149b1ed79bf0cecde38f17a854ecfa0f0a42f1ff0b@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
>>>>>> On Nov 1, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <
>> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> This PR has been merged to develop
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/1/18 1:35 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
>>>>>>> I would like to get this PR in the release:
>>>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757
>>>>>>> I'm testing the merge to develop now
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
>>>>>>>> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
>>>>>>>> critical issue.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to
>>>>> develop.
>>>>>>>> Sai
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <
>>> amurmann@pivotal.io
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we
>> should
>>>>> only
>>>>>>>>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some
>> reason
>>>>> (not
>>>>>>>>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has
>>>>> been cut.
>>>>>>>>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are
>> trying
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
>>>>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting
>> for
>>>>>>>>>> doc update.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Sai
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <
>>>>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to
>> time
>>>>> based
>>>>>>>>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not
>>> be
>>>>> cut
>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>>>>> soon as possible?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>.
Hi Ryan,
I am currently waiting for the failing DUnit tests to pass and then plan to
cut the release branch. Does it work for you if the fixes for GEODE-5972
would be merged to the branch after it has been cut?
On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:57 AM Ryan McMahon <rm...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> Bill Burcham and I have been working on a data inconsistency issue which
> involves a lost event across WAN sites during rebalance on the originating
> site. We are currently performing root cause analysis. Below is a Geode
> ticket which we will update with more details as we learn more.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-5972
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:23 PM Ernest Burghardt <eb...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
> > and PR 390 has been approved and merged
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:10 PM Ernest Burghardt <eb...@pivotal.io>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > geode-native fixes are in
> > https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/390
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 4:06 PM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> The geode-native source headers I mentioned in [1] need to be cleaned
> > up.
> > >>
> > >> Anthony
> > >>
> > >> [1]
> > >>
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8c9da19d7c0ef0149b1ed79bf0cecde38f17a854ecfa0f0a42f1ff0b@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
> > >>
> > >> > On Nov 1, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <
> bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > This PR has been merged to develop
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On 11/1/18 1:35 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
> > >> >> I would like to get this PR in the release:
> > >> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I'm testing the merge to develop now
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> > >> >>> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
> > >> >>> critical issue.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to
> > >> develop.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Sai
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <
> > amurmann@pivotal.io
> > >> >
> > >> >>> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we
> should
> > >> only
> > >> >>>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some
> reason
> > >> (not
> > >> >>>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has
> > >> been cut.
> > >> >>>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are
> trying
> > >> to
> > >> >>>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
> > >> >>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>
> > >> >>>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting
> for
> > >> >>>>> doc update.
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> Sai
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <
> > >> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > >> >>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> Hi everyone,
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to
> time
> > >> based
> > >> >>>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not
> > be
> > >> cut
> > >> >>>> as
> > >> >>>>>> soon as possible?
> > >> >>>>>>
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Ryan McMahon <rm...@pivotal.io>.
Bill Burcham and I have been working on a data inconsistency issue which
involves a lost event across WAN sites during rebalance on the originating
site. We are currently performing root cause analysis. Below is a Geode
ticket which we will update with more details as we learn more.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-5972
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:23 PM Ernest Burghardt <eb...@pivotal.io>
wrote:
> and PR 390 has been approved and merged
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:10 PM Ernest Burghardt <eb...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
> > geode-native fixes are in
> https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/390
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 4:06 PM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> >> The geode-native source headers I mentioned in [1] need to be cleaned
> up.
> >>
> >> Anthony
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8c9da19d7c0ef0149b1ed79bf0cecde38f17a854ecfa0f0a42f1ff0b@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
> >>
> >> > On Nov 1, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > This PR has been merged to develop
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 11/1/18 1:35 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
> >> >> I would like to get this PR in the release:
> >> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm testing the merge to develop now
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> >> >>> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
> >> >>> critical issue.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to
> >> develop.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Sai
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <
> amurmann@pivotal.io
> >> >
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we should
> >> only
> >> >>>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some reason
> >> (not
> >> >>>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has
> >> been cut.
> >> >>>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are trying
> >> to
> >> >>>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
> >> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
> >> >>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting for
> >> >>>>> doc update.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Sai
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <
> >> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> >> >>>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>> Hi everyone,
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to time
> >> based
> >> >>>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not
> be
> >> cut
> >> >>>> as
> >> >>>>>> soon as possible?
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Ernest Burghardt <eb...@pivotal.io>.
and PR 390 has been approved and merged
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:10 PM Ernest Burghardt <eb...@pivotal.io>
wrote:
> geode-native fixes are in https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/390
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 4:06 PM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
>> The geode-native source headers I mentioned in [1] need to be cleaned up.
>>
>> Anthony
>>
>> [1]
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8c9da19d7c0ef0149b1ed79bf0cecde38f17a854ecfa0f0a42f1ff0b@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
>>
>> > On Nov 1, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > This PR has been merged to develop
>> >
>> >
>> > On 11/1/18 1:35 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
>> >> I would like to get this PR in the release:
>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757
>> >>
>> >> I'm testing the merge to develop now
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
>> >>> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
>> >>> critical issue.
>> >>>
>> >>> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to
>> develop.
>> >>>
>> >>> Sai
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <amurmann@pivotal.io
>> >
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we should
>> only
>> >>>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some reason
>> (not
>> >>>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has
>> been cut.
>> >>>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are trying
>> to
>> >>>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
>> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting for
>> >>>>> doc update.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Sai
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <
>> amurmann@pivotal.io>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hi everyone,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to time
>> based
>> >>>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not be
>> cut
>> >>>> as
>> >>>>>> soon as possible?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Ernest Burghardt <eb...@pivotal.io>.
geode-native fixes are in https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/390
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 4:06 PM Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> The geode-native source headers I mentioned in [1] need to be cleaned up.
>
> Anthony
>
> [1]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8c9da19d7c0ef0149b1ed79bf0cecde38f17a854ecfa0f0a42f1ff0b@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
>
> > On Nov 1, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
> >
> > This PR has been merged to develop
> >
> >
> > On 11/1/18 1:35 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
> >> I would like to get this PR in the release:
> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757
> >>
> >> I'm testing the merge to develop now
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> >>> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
> >>> critical issue.
> >>>
> >>> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to
> develop.
> >>>
> >>> Sai
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we should
> only
> >>>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some reason
> (not
> >>>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has been
> cut.
> >>>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are trying to
> >>>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
> sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting for
> >>>>> doc update.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sai
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <
> amurmann@pivotal.io>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi everyone,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to time
> based
> >>>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not be
> cut
> >>>> as
> >>>>>> soon as possible?
> >>>>>>
> >>
> >
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Anthony Baker <ab...@pivotal.io>.
The geode-native source headers I mentioned in [1] need to be cleaned up.
Anthony
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8c9da19d7c0ef0149b1ed79bf0cecde38f17a854ecfa0f0a42f1ff0b@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E
> On Nov 1, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> This PR has been merged to develop
>
>
> On 11/1/18 1:35 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
>> I would like to get this PR in the release: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757
>>
>> I'm testing the merge to develop now
>>
>>
>> On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
>>> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
>>> critical issue.
>>>
>>> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to develop.
>>>
>>> Sai
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we should only
>>>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some reason (not
>>>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has been cut.
>>>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are trying to
>>>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting for
>>>>> doc update.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sai
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to time based
>>>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not be cut
>>>> as
>>>>>> soon as possible?
>>>>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io>.
This PR has been merged to develop
On 11/1/18 1:35 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote:
> I would like to get this PR in the release:
> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757
>
> I'm testing the merge to develop now
>
>
> On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
>> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
>> critical issue.
>>
>> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to develop.
>>
>> Sai
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we should
>>> only
>>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some reason (not
>>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has
>>> been cut.
>>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are trying to
>>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda
>>> <sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting for
>>>> doc update.
>>>>
>>>> Sai
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann
>>>> <am...@pivotal.io>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to time
>>>>> based
>>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not be
>>>>> cut
>>> as
>>>>> soon as possible?
>>>>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io>.
I would like to get this PR in the release:
https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757
I'm testing the merge to develop now
On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
> critical issue.
>
> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to develop.
>
> Sai
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we should only
>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some reason (not
>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has been cut.
>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are trying to
>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting for
>>> doc update.
>>>
>>> Sai
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to time based
>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not be cut
>> as
>>>> soon as possible?
>>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@gmail.com>.
Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a
critical issue.
This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to develop.
Sai
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>
wrote:
> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we should only
> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some reason (not
> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has been cut.
> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are trying to
> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <sai.boorlagadda@gmail.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting for
> > doc update.
> >
> > Sai
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to time based
> > > releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not be cut
> as
> > > soon as possible?
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>.
In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we should only
hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some reason (not
sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has been cut.
Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are trying to
avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense?
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting for
> doc update.
>
> Sai
>
> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to time based
> > releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not be cut as
> > soon as possible?
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Cutting 1.8 release branch
Posted by Sai Boorlagadda <sa...@gmail.com>.
I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting for
doc update.
Sai
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann <am...@pivotal.io>
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to time based
> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not be cut as
> soon as possible?
>