accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Time for a 1.8.0 release?
Date Wed, 03 Aug 2016 21:19:05 GMT
If 134 and 136 are ready, they should be merged. I think they might be
close, if not done. 134 could be done in the next bugfix, but 136 should
really be done on a minor, since it's a user-facing change in behavior,
even though it's not public API. I'd hate for it to have to wait for the
next minor to make it in.

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 5:11 PM Michael Wall <mjwall@gmail.com> wrote:

> Good points Christopher.
>
> Here are the patch available tickets.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20ACCUMULO%20AND%20status%20%3D%20%22Patch%20Available%22%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC
> Most are slated for 1.9.0, one is assigned to 2.0.0.
>
> 6 PRs
>
> 2 olds ones I was ignoring.  I don't think they are ready
> https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/32
> https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/43
>
> Your PR to remove bundled jars from -bin.tar.gz at
> https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/131.  That is a 2.0 feature.
>
> ivakegg's PR to fix syncronization in deep copies, assigned to 1.8.1,
> https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/134
>
> 2 from millerruntime
> Improvements to the ChangeSecretTool at
> https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/136.  This one is assigned to
> 1.8.1
> TwoTierCompactionStrategy at https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/135,
> not assigned to any release.  I left comment on the ticket.
>
> Anyone think any of these need to go into 1.8.0?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Err, actually, before you do that, let's double check that we're not
> > ignoring outstanding PRs which are ready to merge, or JIRAs marked with
> > Patch Available.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:58 PM Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Go for it, Mike!
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM Michael Wall <mjwall@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I just moved the last 2 tickets out of 1.8.0.  Both tickets were for
> > >> failing ITs.  Seems like we are ready now for the release.  Anyone
> > >> disagree?
> > >>
> > >> I plan on making an RC tomorrow.  I'll start with a RC0 to work out
> the
> > >> process then make an RC1 if that goes smoothly.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Keith Turner <keith@deenlo.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Michael Wall <mjwall@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Didn't get a chance to talk to Christopher so hopefully what
I
> > >> understood
> > >> > > from emails with Josh and him is correct.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Moved issues out of 1.8.0.  Here is a summary of the fix version
> > >> changes
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 8 issues - 1.7.2, 1.8.0 => 1.7.2, 1.8.1
> > >> > > 9 issues - 1.6.6, 1.7.3, 1.8.0 => 1.6.6, 1.7.3, 1.8.1
> > >> > > 34 issues - 1.7.3, 1.8.0 => 1.7.3, 1.8.1
> > >> > > 102 issues (BUG) - 1.8.0 => 1.8.1
> > >> > > 248 issues (not BUG) - 1.8.0 => 1.9.1
> > >> > >
> > >> > > That leaves 3 issues in 1.8.0, I made them blockers
> > >> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4157 (WAL can
be
> > >> > > prematurely deleted)
> > >> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4165 (Create
a
> > user
> > >> > level
> > >> > > API for RFile)
> > >> > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1124 (optimize
> > index
> > >> > size
> > >> > > in RFile)
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Keith has a PR in for 1124.  I am looking to put in a PR for
4157
> > >> > > tomorrow/Sat.  Keith, if I need to move 4165 to 1.8.1 let me
know.
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> > 1124 is merged.  4165 has a PR.  I also created a PR for 4318[1].
> > While
> > >> > testing the new RFile API I tried to use try-with-resources with a
> > >> scanner
> > >> > and found I could not.  I think it would be nice to get 4318 into
> > 1.8.0
> > >> > because its a change that can only be made on a minor release.
> > >> >
> > >> > [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-
> > >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4165>4318
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Once those are closed/moved, I will cut an RC1.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Mike
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Michael Wall <mjwall@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Christopher,
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I'd like to talk this through with you before I move the
tickets
> > to
> > >> > make
> > >> > > > sure I understand what you are saying here.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Thanks for the note, it is helpful.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Mike
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Christopher <
> ctubbsii@apache.org
> > >
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >> On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 9:42 PM Michael Wall <mjwall@gmail.com
> >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> > After last weeks discussion with Josh, Christopher
and others
> > at
> > >> the
> > >> > > >> > Accumulo Working Day, I am going to shepherd the
1.8 release.
> > >> First
> > >> > > >> step
> > >> > > >> > is to create a release candidate?  Before I do
that, are
> there
> > >> any
> > >> > > >> tickets
> > >> > > >> > that need to get into the release?  I know Keith
mentioned 1
> > or 2
> > >> > and
> > >> > > I
> > >> > > >> > have one I'd like to finish.
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> > Here is what Jira says is unresolved,
> > >> > > >> > https://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.8-unresolved
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> > On Wed I would like to move all tickets not identified
for
> the
> > >> 1.8
> > >> > > >> release
> > >> > > >> > to 2.0.  Then on Friday I would like to cut the
first release
> > >> > > candidate
> > >> > > >> for
> > >> > > >> > 1.8.  Is that enough time?  Anything I am missing?
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> > Thanks
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> > Mike
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> I think it's probably time. I don't know that I'd bump
the
> stuff
> > to
> > >> > 2.0.
> > >> > > >> I'd rather bump it to 1.9, just because we've been on
a roll
> with
> > >> this
> > >> > > >> backwards compatibility thing, and I think there's probably
> > ongoing
> > >> > > demand
> > >> > > >> for updated 1.x versions.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> I'll try to go through the issues I've created (or have
> assigned
> > to
> > >> > me)
> > >> > > >> and
> > >> > > >> bump them myself. So, if you could hold off on that
for a few
> > more
> > >> > days,
> > >> > > >> it
> > >> > > >> would help.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> Also, keep in mind, if you do bump using JIRAs batch
features,
> > >> you've
> > >> > > got
> > >> > > >> to do it multiple times, depending on if they have more
than
> one
> > >> > > >> fixVersion
> > >> > > >> on them, otherwise you'll overwrite the multiple versions
with
> a
> > >> > single
> > >> > > >> one
> > >> > > >> (or vice versa).
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> Eg.
> > >> > > >> (1.6.6, 1.7.2, 1.8.0) -> (1.6.6, 1.7.2, 1.8.1) //
should just
> be
> > >> bug
> > >> > > fixes
> > >> > > >> (1.7.2, 1.8.0) -> (1.7.2, 1.8.1) // should just be
bug fixes
> > >> > > >> (1.8.0) -> (1.8.1 or 1.9.0) // depends on if bugfix
or feature
> > >> > addition
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message