geode-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bruce Schuchardt <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Pulling the current proposed 1.10 release until we can agree on develop being stable
Date Tue, 27 Aug 2019 18:56:20 GMT
+1 for going ahead with the current release/1.10

On 8/27/19 11:31 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
> +1 to creating RC1 with the current release/1.10 branch this week.
> I don't see a fundamental problem with cherry-picking some targeted and
> tested fixes to release/1.10, based on our assessment of the risk to
> customers vs. the risk of destabilizing the branch. I think release/1.10 is
> in a good state, and we should go ahead with the release.
> -Dan
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 9:28 AM Bruce Schuchardt <>
> wrote:
>> The "develop" branch has a refactoring of membership code that should
>> not be included in 1.10.  I waited until the release branch was cut to
>> push these changes.
>> On 8/26/19 4:06 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer wrote:
>>> Hi there Apache Geode devs,
>>> It has been some weeks since the proposed 1.10 release was cut. We've
>>> gone through a few cycles where we keep on submitting "please include
>>> ticket GEODE-XXX" because it is critical and will break the system.
>>> WHICH in reality tells me that current develop is broken and unstable.
>>> I'm going to suggest that we abandon the current 1.10 release branch.
>>> I cannot shake the feeling that our continuous cherry picking into a
>>> branch will result in either the branch becoming unmaintainable, given
>>> we have only select fixes in the branch OR we end up with a branch
>>> that is more stable than our current development branch, which would
>>> result in us having to rebase the develop branch onto the 1.10 branch.
>>> I propose that once we see the pipeline is clean and green for a solid
>>> we then again attempt to cut 1.10 branch.
>>> We CANNOT continue adding to a branch in order to stabilize it.. It
>>> just means the branch we cut from is unstable. If we cannot cut a
>>> branch from develop without having to have weeks of stabilization
>>> cycles, then our main branch is broken...
>>> Either way, not a good spot to be in.
>>> Thoughts?
>>> --Udo

View raw message