accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Wall <mjw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Time for a 1.8.0 release?
Date Wed, 03 Aug 2016 21:11:12 GMT
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