If we push it to Sept 1 freeze, I'll personally spend a lot of time testing.
What can I do to help convince the Jun1 folks that Sept1 is acceptable? On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Ben Bromhead <b...@instaclustr.com> wrote: > I would also suggest if you can't commit to June 2 due to timing or feature > set. If you could provide the absolute minimum date / features that would > let you commit to testing, that would be useful. > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 3:49 PM Ben Bromhead <b...@instaclustr.com> wrote: > > > We (Instaclustr) are also happy to get started testing. Including > > (internal to Instaclustr) production workloads. > > > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 3:45 PM Nate McCall <zznat...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> To be clear, more who is willing to commit to testing should we go this > >> route. > >> > >> On Fri, Apr 13, 2018, 7:41 AM Nate McCall <zznat...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Ok. So who's willing to test 4.0 on June 2nd? Let's start a sign up. > >> > > >> > We (tlp) will put some resources on this via going through some canned > >> > scenarios we have internally. We aren't in a position to test data > >> validity > >> > (yet) but we can do a lot around cluster behavior. > >> > > >> > Who else has specific stuff they are willing to do? Even if it's just > >> > tee'ing prod traffic, that would be hugely valuable. > >> > > >> > On Fri, Apr 13, 2018, 6:15 AM Jeff Jirsa <jji...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> >> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:41 AM, Jonathan Haddad <j...@jonhaddad.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > It sounds to me (please correct me if I'm wrong) like Jeff is > arguing > >> >> that > >> >> > releasing 4.0 in 2 months isn't worth the effort of evaluating it, > >> >> because > >> >> > it's a big task and there's not enough stuff in 4.0 to make it > >> >> worthwhile. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> More like "not enough stuff in 4.0 to make it worthwhile for the > >> people I > >> >> personally know to be willing and able to find the weird bugs". > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > If that is the case, I'm not quite sure how increasing the surface > >> area > >> >> of > >> >> > changed code which needs to be vetted is going to make the process > >> any > >> >> > easier. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> It changes the interest level of at least some of the people able to > >> >> properly test it from "not willing" to "willing". > >> >> > >> >> Totally possible that there exist people who are willing and able to > >> find > >> >> and fix those bugs, who just haven't committed to it in this thread. > >> >> That's > >> >> probably why Sankalp keeps asking who's actually willing to do the > >> testing > >> >> on June 2 - if nobody's going to commit to doing real testing on June > >> 2, > >> >> all we're doing is adding inconvenience to those of us who'd be > >> willing to > >> >> do it later in the year. > >> >> > >> > > >> > > -- > > Ben Bromhead > > CTO | Instaclustr <https://www.instaclustr.com/> > > +1 650 284 9692 > > Reliability at Scale > > Cassandra, Spark, Elasticsearch on AWS, Azure, GCP and Softlayer > > > -- > Ben Bromhead > CTO | Instaclustr <https://www.instaclustr.com/> > +1 650 284 9692 > Reliability at Scale > Cassandra, Spark, Elasticsearch on AWS, Azure, GCP and Softlayer >
