cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gregory Szorc <gregory.sz...@xobni.com>
Subject RE: Request For 0.6.12 Release
Date Fri, 18 Feb 2011 02:16:37 GMT
Aaron,

Thank you very much for initiating the voting process. I'm looking forward to running this
release.

Was there any discussion around improving the communication of known issues with releases?

Gregory

From: Aaron Morton [mailto:aaron@thelastpickle.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 4:21 PM
To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: Re: Request For 0.6.12 Release

Gregory,
There is a vote going on for 0.6.12 now
http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@cassandra.apache.org/msg01808.html

If you have time grab the bin and give it a test http://people.apache.org/~eevans
Aaron

On 16 Feb, 2011,at 09:21 PM, Aaron Morton <aaron@thelastpickle.com<mailto:aaron@thelastpickle.com>>
wrote:
Have checked it's all in the 0.6 branch and asked the devs for a 0.6.12 release. Will let
you know how it goes.
cheers
Aaron

On 16 Feb, 2011,at 08:38 AM, Aaron Morton <aaron@thelastpickle.com<mailto:aaron@thelastpickle.com>>
wrote:
I worked on that ticket, will try to chase it up.


Aaron


On 15/02/2011, at 2:01 PM, Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com<mailto:gregory.szorc@gmail.com>>
wrote:

The latest official 0.6.x releases, 0.6.10 and 0.6.11, have a very serious bug/regression
when performing some quorum reads (CASSANDRA-2081), which is fixed in the head of the 0.6
branch If there aren't any plans to cut 0.6.12 any time soon, as an end user, I request that
an official and "blessed" release of 0.6.x be made ASAP.

On a related note, I am frustrated that such a serious issue has lingered in the "latest oldstable
release." I would have liked to see one or more of the following:


1)      The issue documented prominently on the apache.org<http://apache.org> web site
and inside the download archive so end users would know they are downloading and running known-broken
software

2)      The 0.6.10 and 0.6.11 builds pulled after identification of the issue

3)      A 0.6.12 release cut immediately (with reasonable time for testing, of course) to
address the issue

I understand that releases may not always be as stable as we all desire. But, I hope that
when future bugs affecting the bread and butter properties of a distributed storage engine
surface (especially when they are regressions) that the official project response (preferably
via mailing list and the web site) is swift and maximizes the potential for data integrity
and availability.

If there is anything I can do to help the process, I'd gladly give some of my time to help
the overall community.

Gregory Szorc
gregory.szorc@gmail.com<mailto:gregory.szorc@gmail.com>


Mime
View raw message