geode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nabarun Nag <n...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Geode 1.7.0 release branch created
Date Tue, 04 Sep 2018 17:50:06 GMT
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 <demery@pivotal.io> wrote:

> I have resolved GEODE-5254
>
> Dale
>
> > On Aug 31, 2018, at 3:34 PM, Nabarun Nag <nnag@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 <nnag@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 <nnag@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 <nnag@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
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
>
>

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