geode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Barnes <dbar...@pivotal.io>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Proposal to re-cut Geode 1.9.0 release branch
Date Wed, 20 Mar 2019 17:42:19 GMT
The geode-native PR will be ready to check in momentarily. Just waiting for
Travis to do its diligence.

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 9:47 AM Alexander Murmann <amurmann@apache.org>
wrote:

> Dale, do I understand correctly that the only concern around the Micrometer
> work right now it that it's not useful yet, however it's not harmful
> either?
>
> Dave, is it correct that if that PR doesn't make it into the newly cut
> branch, we'd be shipping with a older version of geode-native? What are the
> two versions and what would be the implications of this not making it into
> this release?
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 5:29 PM Dave Barnes <dbarnes@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > The Geode 1.9.0 release includes a source-only release of the
> geode-native
> > repo. There's a pull-request in process to update version numbers and the
> > doc build environment in that repo; should be ready to merge tomorrow
> > morning.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 5:20 PM Dale Emery <demery@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> > > The Micrometer API is in, and marked as experimental. But we have not
> yet
> > > updated CacheFactory to allow injecting a meter registry (or metrics
> > > publishing service) there. So currently the only way to publish is to
> add
> > > metrics publishing service via the ServiceLoader mechanism.
> > >
> > > —
> > > Dale Emery
> > > demery@pivotal.io
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Mar 19, 2019, at 3:29 PM, Dan Smith <dsmith@pivotal.io> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Is the geode-managability sub-project and the new micrometer API in a
> > > place
> > > > where we can cut a release branch? I know a bunch of changes have
> gone
> > in
> > > > since the release branch, are we comfortable releasing these new
> > > > experimental features as they are right now?
> > > >
> > > > -Dan
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 2:38 PM Dick Cavender <dixie@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> +1 to re-cutting the 1.9 release branch off a more stable develop
> sha
> > > >> within the last couple days.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 1:14 PM Bruce Schuchardt <
> > > bschuchardt@pivotal.io>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> If we recut the release branch we need to update JIRA tickets
> marked
> > > >>> fixed in 1.10
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 3/19/19 12:48 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote:
> > > >>>>> It was known at the time that develop was not as stable
as
> desired,
> > > >>>> so we planned to cherry-pick fixes from develop until the
release
> > > >>>> branch was stable enough to ship.
> > > >>>> I want to clarify that we decided to cut the release branch
not
> that
> > > >>>> develop was not stable. But really that it is desirable to
cut the
> > > >>>> branch sooner to avoid any regression risk that can be introduced
> by
> > > >>>> on-going work on develop.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Nevertheless looks like develop is more stable than release
branch
> > due
> > > >>>> to some test fixes that were not cherry-picked into the release
> > > branch.
> > > >>>> I think its a good idea to re-cut the branch as our current
> position
> > > >>>> to stabilize release branch before releasing.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> +1 to re-cut.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Sai
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 12:19 PM Owen Nichols <
> onichols@pivotal.io
> > > >>>> <mailto:onichols@pivotal.io>> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>    The Geode 1.9.0 release branch was originally cut 4 weeks
ago
> on
> > > >>>>    Feb 19.  It was known at the time that develop was not
as
> stable
> > > >>>>    as desired, so we planned to cherry-pick fixes from develop
> until
> > > >>>>    the release branch was stable enough to ship.  While this
is a
> > > >>>>    good strategy when starting from a fairly good baseline,
it
> seems
> > > >>>>    in this case it has only added complexity without leading
to
> > > >>>>    stability.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>    Looking at the pipelines over the last week (see attached
> > > >>>>    metrics), it appears we have been far more successful at
> > > >>>>    stabilizing /develop/ than /release/1.9.0/. Rather than
trying
> to
> > > >>>>    cherry-pick more and more fixes to the release branch,
I
> propose
> > > >>>>    we RE-CUT the 1.9.0 release branch later this week in order
to
> > > >>>>    start from a much more stable baseline.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>    -Owen
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

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