Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Tyler Hobbs]

+1

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Michael Shuler 
wrote:

> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
>
> sha1: ce609d19fd130e16184d9e6d37ffee4a1ebad607
> Git:
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=
> shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> Artifacts:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachecassandra-1126/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachecassandra-1126/
>
> The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
>
> [1]: (CHANGES.txt) https://goo.gl/b80Qe2
> [2]: (NEWS.txt) https://goo.gl/Aen2iN
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Michael
>



-- 
Tyler Hobbs
DataStax 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Gary Dusbabek]

+1

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:52 AM, Michael Shuler 
wrote:

> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
>
> sha1: ce609d19fd130e16184d9e6d37ffee4a1ebad607
> Git:
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=
> shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> Artifacts:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachecassandra-1126/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachecassandra-1126/
>
> The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
>
> [1]: (CHANGES.txt) https://goo.gl/b80Qe2
> [2]: (NEWS.txt) https://goo.gl/Aen2iN
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Michael
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Aleksey Yeschenko]

+1

-- 
AY

On 26 September 2016 at 15:52:26, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote:

I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.  

sha1: ce609d19fd130e16184d9e6d37ffee4a1ebad607  
Git:  
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
  
Artifacts:  
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1126/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
  
Staging repository:  
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1126/  

The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler  

The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).  

[1]: (CHANGES.txt) https://goo.gl/b80Qe2  
[2]: (NEWS.txt) https://goo.gl/Aen2iN  

--  
Kind regards,  
Michael  

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Sam Tunnicliffe]

+1

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Michael Shuler 
wrote:

> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
>
> sha1: ce609d19fd130e16184d9e6d37ffee4a1ebad607
> Git:
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=
> shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> Artifacts:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachecassandra-1126/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachecassandra-1126/
>
> The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
>
> [1]: (CHANGES.txt) https://goo.gl/b80Qe2
> [2]: (NEWS.txt) https://goo.gl/Aen2iN
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Michael
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Sylvain Lebresne]

+1

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 3:03 AM, Jeff Jirsa  wrote:

>
> +1
>
> On 2016-09-26 07:52 (-0700), Michael Shuler 
> wrote:
> > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
> >
> > sha1: ce609d19fd130e16184d9e6d37ffee4a1ebad607
> > Git:
> > http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=
> shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> > Artifacts:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachecassandra-1126/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> > Staging repository:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/
> orgapachecassandra-1126/
> >
> > The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~
> mshuler
> >
> > The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> >
> > [1]: (CHANGES.txt) https://goo.gl/b80Qe2
> > [2]: (NEWS.txt) https://goo.gl/Aen2iN
> >
> > --
> > Kind regards,
> > Michael
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Jeff Jirsa]

+1

On 2016-09-26 07:52 (-0700), Michael Shuler  wrote: 
> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
> 
> sha1: ce609d19fd130e16184d9e6d37ffee4a1ebad607
> Git:
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> Artifacts:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1126/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1126/
> 
> The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler
> 
> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> 
> [1]: (CHANGES.txt) https://goo.gl/b80Qe2
> [2]: (NEWS.txt) https://goo.gl/Aen2iN
> 
> -- 
> Kind regards,
> Michael
> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Nate McCall]

+1

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 3:52 AM, Michael Shuler  wrote:
> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
>
> sha1: ce609d19fd130e16184d9e6d37ffee4a1ebad607
> Git:
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> Artifacts:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1126/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1126/
>
> The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
>
> [1]: (CHANGES.txt) https://goo.gl/b80Qe2
> [2]: (NEWS.txt) https://goo.gl/Aen2iN
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Michael

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Tyler Hobbs]

Agreed, option #2 is my preference as well.

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:04 PM, Dave Brosius 
wrote:

> Option Two seems reasonable to me
>
>
> ---
> 
>
>
> On 2016-07-28 14:47, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote:
>
>> Jake was just swapping his vote +1 to -1.
>>
>> Swapping mine to -1 too, so that we have a binding -1 majority now.
>>
>> Let’s get #12236 in and then decide what to do.
>>
>> --
>> AY
>>
>> On 28 July 2016 at 19:46:56, Benedict Elliott Smith (bened...@apache.org)
>> wrote:
>>
>> I think -1 lacks a little clarity when responding to a block of prose with
>> multiple clauses, suggestions and no single proposition requiring a yes/no
>> answer.
>>
>> As fun as it is to type -1.
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, 28 July 2016, Jake Luciani > > wrote:
>>
>> -1
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Let me sum up my thoughts so far.
>>> >
>>> > Some of the most important goals of tick-tock were 1) predictable,
>>> regular
>>> > releases with manageable changesets and
>>> > 2)individual releases that are more stable than in our previous
>>> process.
>>> >
>>> > Now, we’ve already slipped a few times. Most recently with 3.6, and now
>>> > with 3.8. If we push 3.9 as well, then the delay
>>> > will cascade: 3.10, 3.11, and 3.12 will all be late according to the
>>> > original plan.
>>> >
>>> > In other words, if we delay 3.9, then 6 out of 12 tick-tock releases
>>> will
>>> > be off-schedule.
>>> >
>>> > Worse, so will be 3.0.9, 3.0.10, 3.0.11, and 3.0.12.
>>> >
>>> > Now, #12236 is indeed an issue, but it really is a minor annoyance, and
>>> > goes away quickly after upgrading. And let’s not
>>> > kid ourselves that just by fixing #12236 alone 3.8 will somehow become
>>> a
>>> > stable release. No amount of passive aggressive
>>> > remarks is going to change that, either. So the choices as I see them
>>> > were: a) release 3.8 with a known minor annoyance now,
>>> > so that we can at least save 3.9 to 3.12 schedule or b) delay 3.9-3.12
>>> and
>>> > 3.0.9-3.0.12 by a month, each, without that minor annoyance,
>>> > but ultimately have just as stable/unstable 3.8. The pragmatic choice
>>> in
>>> > my opinion is clearly (a): we at least maintain some regularity that
>>> way.
>>> >
>>> > That said, after having though about it more, I realised that it’s the
>>> odd
>>> > 3.9, not the even 3.8 that’s already late, that I really care about.
>>> > So here are the two options I suggest - and I’m fine with either:
>>> >
>>> > 1. Release 3.8 as is now. It’s an even preview release that can live
>>> fine
>>> > with one minor annoyance on upgrade. Have 3.9 released on schedule.
>>> > Since the vote technically passed, we can just do it, now.
>>> >
>>> > 2. Wait until #12236 is in, and release 3.8 then, doesn’t matter when.
>>> > Have 3.9+ released on schedule. Even though the delta between 3.8 and
>>> 3.9
>>> > would
>>> > be tiny, it’s still IMO less confusing than skipping a whole version,
>>> and
>>> > a lot more preferable than failing the schedule for 4 upcoming 3.x and
>>> > 3.0.x releases.
>>> >
>>> > 3.9, after all, *does* have a month of bugfix only stabilisation
>>> changes
>>> > in it. So does 3.0.9. The sooner we can get those into people’s hands,
>>> the
>>> > better.
>>> > 3.8 is ultimately unimportant. Even if we release 3.8 and 3.9 on the
>>> same
>>> > date, it’s not a huge deal.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > P.S. I feel like 1 week freeze is insufficient given a monthly cadence.
>>> If
>>> > we are to keep the monthly cycle, we should probably extend the freeze
>>> to
>>> > two weeks,
>>> > so that we have time to fix problems uncovered by regular and, more
>>> > importantly, upgrade tests.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > AY
>>> >
>>> > On 27 July 2016 at 22:04:31, Michael Shuler (mshu...@apache.org)
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I apologize for messing this vote up.
>>> >
>>> > So, what should happen now? Drop RESULT from the subject and continue
>>> > discussion of alternatives and voting?
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Kind regards,
>>> > Michael
>>> >
>>> > On 07/27/2016 06:33 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote:
>>> > > The difference is that those -1s were based on new information
>>> > > discovered after the vote was started, while this one wasn’t.
>>> > >
>>> > > In addition to that, the discussion was still ongoing, and a decision
>>> > > on the alternative has not been made. As such closing the vote was
>>> > > definitely premature.
>>> > >
>>> > > FWIW I intended to swap my +1 with a -1, but was not given a chance
>>> > > to do so. As for what alternative I prefer, I’m not sure yet.
>>> > >
>>> > > -- AY
>>> > >
>>> > > On 27 July 2016 at 09:59:50, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com)
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko
>>> > >  wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> Sorry, but I’m counting 3 binding +1s and 1 binding -1 (2, if you
>>> > >> 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Dave Brosius]

Option Two seems reasonable to me


---


On 2016-07-28 14:47, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote:

Jake was just swapping his vote +1 to -1.

Swapping mine to -1 too, so that we have a binding -1 majority now.

Let’s get #12236 in and then decide what to do.

-- 
AY

On 28 July 2016 at 19:46:56, Benedict Elliott Smith 
(bened...@apache.org) wrote:


I think -1 lacks a little clarity when responding to a block of prose 
with
multiple clauses, suggestions and no single proposition requiring a 
yes/no

answer.

As fun as it is to type -1.


On Thursday, 28 July 2016, Jake Luciani > wrote:


-1

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko 


wrote:

> Let me sum up my thoughts so far.
>
> Some of the most important goals of tick-tock were 1) predictable,
regular
> releases with manageable changesets and
> 2)individual releases that are more stable than in our previous process.
>
> Now, we’ve already slipped a few times. Most recently with 3.6, and now
> with 3.8. If we push 3.9 as well, then the delay
> will cascade: 3.10, 3.11, and 3.12 will all be late according to the
> original plan.
>
> In other words, if we delay 3.9, then 6 out of 12 tick-tock releases will
> be off-schedule.
>
> Worse, so will be 3.0.9, 3.0.10, 3.0.11, and 3.0.12.
>
> Now, #12236 is indeed an issue, but it really is a minor annoyance, and
> goes away quickly after upgrading. And let’s not
> kid ourselves that just by fixing #12236 alone 3.8 will somehow become a
> stable release. No amount of passive aggressive
> remarks is going to change that, either. So the choices as I see them
> were: a) release 3.8 with a known minor annoyance now,
> so that we can at least save 3.9 to 3.12 schedule or b) delay 3.9-3.12
and
> 3.0.9-3.0.12 by a month, each, without that minor annoyance,
> but ultimately have just as stable/unstable 3.8. The pragmatic choice in
> my opinion is clearly (a): we at least maintain some regularity that way.
>
> That said, after having though about it more, I realised that it’s the
odd
> 3.9, not the even 3.8 that’s already late, that I really care about.
> So here are the two options I suggest - and I’m fine with either:
>
> 1. Release 3.8 as is now. It’s an even preview release that can live fine
> with one minor annoyance on upgrade. Have 3.9 released on schedule.
> Since the vote technically passed, we can just do it, now.
>
> 2. Wait until #12236 is in, and release 3.8 then, doesn’t matter when.
> Have 3.9+ released on schedule. Even though the delta between 3.8 and 3.9
> would
> be tiny, it’s still IMO less confusing than skipping a whole version, and
> a lot more preferable than failing the schedule for 4 upcoming 3.x and
> 3.0.x releases.
>
> 3.9, after all, *does* have a month of bugfix only stabilisation changes
> in it. So does 3.0.9. The sooner we can get those into people’s hands,
the
> better.
> 3.8 is ultimately unimportant. Even if we release 3.8 and 3.9 on the same
> date, it’s not a huge deal.
>
>
> P.S. I feel like 1 week freeze is insufficient given a monthly cadence.
If
> we are to keep the monthly cycle, we should probably extend the freeze to
> two weeks,
> so that we have time to fix problems uncovered by regular and, more
> importantly, upgrade tests.
>
> --
> AY
>
> On 27 July 2016 at 22:04:31, Michael Shuler (mshu...@apache.org) wrote:
>
> I apologize for messing this vote up.
>
> So, what should happen now? Drop RESULT from the subject and continue
> discussion of alternatives and voting?
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Michael
>
> On 07/27/2016 06:33 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote:
> > The difference is that those -1s were based on new information
> > discovered after the vote was started, while this one wasn’t.
> >
> > In addition to that, the discussion was still ongoing, and a decision
> > on the alternative has not been made. As such closing the vote was
> > definitely premature.
> >
> > FWIW I intended to swap my +1 with a -1, but was not given a chance
> > to do so. As for what alternative I prefer, I’m not sure yet.
> >
> > -- AY
> >
> > On 27 July 2016 at 09:59:50, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com)
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko
> >  wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry, but I’m counting 3 binding +1s and 1 binding -1 (2, if you
> >> interpret Jonathan’s emails as such).
> >>
> >> Thus, if you were to do close the vote now, the vote is passing
> >> with the binding majority, and the required minimum # of +1s
> >> gained.
> >>
> >> I also don’t see the PMC consensus on ‘August 3.8 release target’.
> >>
> >>
> >> As such, the vote is now reopened for further discussion, and to
> >> allow PMC to change their votes if they feel like it (I, for one,
> >> have just returned, and need to reevaluate 12236 in light of new
> >> comments).
> >>
> >
> > It has been my understanding that we took a more human approach to
> > release decisions than strictly and blindly 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Aleksey Yeschenko]

Jake was just swapping his vote +1 to -1.

Swapping mine to -1 too, so that we have a binding -1 majority now.

Let’s get #12236 in and then decide what to do.

-- 
AY

On 28 July 2016 at 19:46:56, Benedict Elliott Smith (bened...@apache.org) wrote:

I think -1 lacks a little clarity when responding to a block of prose with  
multiple clauses, suggestions and no single proposition requiring a yes/no  
answer.  

As fun as it is to type -1.  


On Thursday, 28 July 2016, Jake Luciani > wrote:  

> -1  
>  
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko   
> wrote:  
>  
> > Let me sum up my thoughts so far.  
> >  
> > Some of the most important goals of tick-tock were 1) predictable,  
> regular  
> > releases with manageable changesets and  
> > 2)individual releases that are more stable than in our previous process.  
> >  
> > Now, we’ve already slipped a few times. Most recently with 3.6, and now  
> > with 3.8. If we push 3.9 as well, then the delay  
> > will cascade: 3.10, 3.11, and 3.12 will all be late according to the  
> > original plan.  
> >  
> > In other words, if we delay 3.9, then 6 out of 12 tick-tock releases will  
> > be off-schedule.  
> >  
> > Worse, so will be 3.0.9, 3.0.10, 3.0.11, and 3.0.12.  
> >  
> > Now, #12236 is indeed an issue, but it really is a minor annoyance, and  
> > goes away quickly after upgrading. And let’s not  
> > kid ourselves that just by fixing #12236 alone 3.8 will somehow become a  
> > stable release. No amount of passive aggressive  
> > remarks is going to change that, either. So the choices as I see them  
> > were: a) release 3.8 with a known minor annoyance now,  
> > so that we can at least save 3.9 to 3.12 schedule or b) delay 3.9-3.12  
> and  
> > 3.0.9-3.0.12 by a month, each, without that minor annoyance,  
> > but ultimately have just as stable/unstable 3.8. The pragmatic choice in  
> > my opinion is clearly (a): we at least maintain some regularity that way.  
> >  
> > That said, after having though about it more, I realised that it’s the  
> odd  
> > 3.9, not the even 3.8 that’s already late, that I really care about.  
> > So here are the two options I suggest - and I’m fine with either:  
> >  
> > 1. Release 3.8 as is now. It’s an even preview release that can live fine  
> > with one minor annoyance on upgrade. Have 3.9 released on schedule.  
> > Since the vote technically passed, we can just do it, now.  
> >  
> > 2. Wait until #12236 is in, and release 3.8 then, doesn’t matter when.  
> > Have 3.9+ released on schedule. Even though the delta between 3.8 and 3.9  
> > would  
> > be tiny, it’s still IMO less confusing than skipping a whole version, and  
> > a lot more preferable than failing the schedule for 4 upcoming 3.x and  
> > 3.0.x releases.  
> >  
> > 3.9, after all, *does* have a month of bugfix only stabilisation changes  
> > in it. So does 3.0.9. The sooner we can get those into people’s hands,  
> the  
> > better.  
> > 3.8 is ultimately unimportant. Even if we release 3.8 and 3.9 on the same  
> > date, it’s not a huge deal.  
> >  
> >  
> > P.S. I feel like 1 week freeze is insufficient given a monthly cadence.  
> If  
> > we are to keep the monthly cycle, we should probably extend the freeze to  
> > two weeks,  
> > so that we have time to fix problems uncovered by regular and, more  
> > importantly, upgrade tests.  
> >  
> > --  
> > AY  
> >  
> > On 27 July 2016 at 22:04:31, Michael Shuler (mshu...@apache.org) wrote:  
> >  
> > I apologize for messing this vote up.  
> >  
> > So, what should happen now? Drop RESULT from the subject and continue  
> > discussion of alternatives and voting?  
> >  
> > --  
> > Kind regards,  
> > Michael  
> >  
> > On 07/27/2016 06:33 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote:  
> > > The difference is that those -1s were based on new information  
> > > discovered after the vote was started, while this one wasn’t.  
> > >  
> > > In addition to that, the discussion was still ongoing, and a decision  
> > > on the alternative has not been made. As such closing the vote was  
> > > definitely premature.  
> > >  
> > > FWIW I intended to swap my +1 with a -1, but was not given a chance  
> > > to do so. As for what alternative I prefer, I’m not sure yet.  
> > >  
> > > -- AY  
> > >  
> > > On 27 July 2016 at 09:59:50, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com)  
> > > wrote:  
> > >  
> > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko  
> > >  wrote:  
> > >  
> > >> Sorry, but I’m counting 3 binding +1s and 1 binding -1 (2, if you  
> > >> interpret Jonathan’s emails as such).  
> > >>  
> > >> Thus, if you were to do close the vote now, the vote is passing  
> > >> with the binding majority, and the required minimum # of +1s  
> > >> gained.  
> > >>  
> > >> I also don’t see the PMC consensus on ‘August 3.8 release target’.  
> > >>  
> > >>  
> > >> As such, 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Brian Hess]

I have no vote here, but I think that #2 is not a good idea here.  We would
be implicitly releasing an "odd" release with new features, which is more
than a little confusing.  I do think that CDC is important, so I don't like
#4 (but for less important reasons than #2).  So, I'm good with options 3,
5, or 6 (and perhaps 1, but I don't know enough about it's severity to
endorse/not endorse option 1).  Basically, please don't do #2 (and I'd like
it if you didn't do #4)  :)

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko 
wrote:

> What we’d usually do is revert the offending ticket and push it to the
> next release, if this indeed were significant enough.
>
> So option 4 would be to revert CDC fast (painful) and ship.
> Option 5 would be to quickly fix the issue, retag, and revote, with 3.9
> still following up on schedule.
> Option 6 would be to ignore the calendar entirely. Fix or revert the issue
> eventually, and release 3.8 then. Have 3.9 and 3.0.9 out at whatever time
> we decide to, and go back to monthly cycles from there on.
>
> TBH I don’t think anybody is even going to notice, or care. So I’m fine
> with 1, 4, 5, 6, but not reverting my +1 so far.
>
> --
> AY
>
> On 21 July 2016 at 14:46:17, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com)
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Jonathan Ellis  wrote:
>
> > I see the alternatives as:
> >
> > 1. Release this as 3.8
> > 2. Skip 3.8 and release 3.9 next month on schedule
> > 3. Skip this month and release 3.8 next month instead
> >
>
> I've hopefully made it clear I don't really like 1. I'm totally fine with
> either 2 or 3 though (with a very very small preference for 3. because I
> suspect skipping a release might confuse a few users, but also knowing that
> 2. has the small advantage of keeping the 3.0.x and 3.x versions released
> more or less in lockstep).
>
>
>
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I still think the issue is minor enough, and with 3.8 being extremely
> > > delayed, and being a non-odd release, at that, we’d be better off just
> > > pushing it.
> > >
> > > Also, I know we’ve been easy on -1s when voting on releases, but I want
> > to
> > > remind people in general that release votes can not be vetoed and only
> > > require a majority of binding votes,
> > > http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
> > >
> > > --
> > > AY
> > >
> > > On 21 July 2016 at 08:57:22, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com)
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Sorry but I'm (binding) -1 on this because of
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12236.
> > >
> > > I disagree that knowingly releasing a version that will temporarily
> break
> > > in-flight queries during upgrade, even if it's for a very short
> > time-frame
> > > until re-connection, is ok. I'll note in particular that in the test
> > > report, there is 74! failures in the upgrade tests (for reference the
> 3.7
> > > test report had only 2 upgrade tests failure both with open tickets).
> > Given
> > > that we have a known problem during upgrade, I don't really buy the "We
> > are
> > > assuming these are due to a recent downsize in instance size that these
> > > tests run on" and that suggest to me the problem is not too minor.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Dave Brosius <
> dbros...@mebigfatguy.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 07/20/2016 05:48 PM, Michael Shuler wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
> > > >>
> > > >> sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c
> > > >> Git:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> > > >> Artifacts:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> > > >> Staging repository:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/
> > > >>
> > > >> The debian packages are available here:
> > > >> http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/
> > > >>
> > > >> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> > > >>
> > > >> [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)
> > > >> [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)
> > > >> [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jonathan Ellis
> > Project Chair, Apache Cassandra
> > co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
> > @spyced
> >
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Aleksey Yeschenko]

What we’d usually do is revert the offending ticket and push it to the next 
release, if this indeed were significant enough.

So option 4 would be to revert CDC fast (painful) and ship.
Option 5 would be to quickly fix the issue, retag, and revote, with 3.9 still 
following up on schedule.
Option 6 would be to ignore the calendar entirely. Fix or revert the issue 
eventually, and release 3.8 then. Have 3.9 and 3.0.9 out at whatever time we 
decide to, and go back to monthly cycles from there on.

TBH I don’t think anybody is even going to notice, or care. So I’m fine with 1, 
4, 5, 6, but not reverting my +1 so far.

-- 
AY

On 21 July 2016 at 14:46:17, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com) wrote:

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Jonathan Ellis  wrote:  

> I see the alternatives as:  
>  
> 1. Release this as 3.8  
> 2. Skip 3.8 and release 3.9 next month on schedule  
> 3. Skip this month and release 3.8 next month instead  
>  

I've hopefully made it clear I don't really like 1. I'm totally fine with  
either 2 or 3 though (with a very very small preference for 3. because I  
suspect skipping a release might confuse a few users, but also knowing that  
2. has the small advantage of keeping the 3.0.x and 3.x versions released  
more or less in lockstep).  



>  
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko   
> wrote:  
>  
> > I still think the issue is minor enough, and with 3.8 being extremely  
> > delayed, and being a non-odd release, at that, we’d be better off just  
> > pushing it.  
> >  
> > Also, I know we’ve been easy on -1s when voting on releases, but I want  
> to  
> > remind people in general that release votes can not be vetoed and only  
> > require a majority of binding votes,  
> > http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes  
> >  
> > --  
> > AY  
> >  
> > On 21 July 2016 at 08:57:22, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com)  
> > wrote:  
> >  
> > Sorry but I'm (binding) -1 on this because of  
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12236.  
> >  
> > I disagree that knowingly releasing a version that will temporarily break  
> > in-flight queries during upgrade, even if it's for a very short  
> time-frame  
> > until re-connection, is ok. I'll note in particular that in the test  
> > report, there is 74! failures in the upgrade tests (for reference the 3.7  
> > test report had only 2 upgrade tests failure both with open tickets).  
> Given  
> > that we have a known problem during upgrade, I don't really buy the "We  
> are  
> > assuming these are due to a recent downsize in instance size that these  
> > tests run on" and that suggest to me the problem is not too minor.  
> >  
> >  
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Dave Brosius   
> > wrote:  
> >  
> > > +1  
> > >  
> > >  
> > > On 07/20/2016 05:48 PM, Michael Shuler wrote:  
> > >  
> > >> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.  
> > >>  
> > >> sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c  
> > >> Git:  
> > >>  
> > >>  
> >  
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
>   
> > >> Artifacts:  
> > >>  
> > >>  
> >  
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
>   
> > >> Staging repository:  
> > >>  
> > >>  
> >  
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/  
> > >>  
> > >> The debian packages are available here:  
> > >> http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/  
> > >>  
> > >> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).  
> > >>  
> > >> [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)  
> > >> [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)  
> > >> [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)  
> > >>  
> > >>  
> > >  
> >  
>  
>  
>  
> --  
> Jonathan Ellis  
> Project Chair, Apache Cassandra  
> co-founder, http://www.datastax.com  
> @spyced  
>  

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Sylvain Lebresne]

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Jonathan Ellis  wrote:

> I see the alternatives as:
>
> 1. Release this as 3.8
> 2. Skip 3.8 and release 3.9 next month on schedule
> 3. Skip this month and release 3.8 next month instead
>

I've hopefully made it clear I don't really like 1. I'm totally fine with
either 2 or 3 though (with a very very small preference for 3. because I
suspect skipping a release might confuse a few users, but also knowing that
2. has the small advantage of keeping the 3.0.x and 3.x versions released
more or less in lockstep).



>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko 
> wrote:
>
> > I still think the issue is minor enough, and with 3.8 being extremely
> > delayed, and being a non-odd release, at that, we’d be better off just
> > pushing it.
> >
> > Also, I know we’ve been easy on -1s when voting on releases, but I want
> to
> > remind people in general that release votes can not be vetoed and only
> > require a majority of binding votes,
> > http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
> >
> > --
> > AY
> >
> > On 21 July 2016 at 08:57:22, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com)
> > wrote:
> >
> > Sorry but I'm (binding) -1 on this because of
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12236.
> >
> > I disagree that knowingly releasing a version that will temporarily break
> > in-flight queries during upgrade, even if it's for a very short
> time-frame
> > until re-connection, is ok. I'll note in particular that in the test
> > report, there is 74! failures in the upgrade tests (for reference the 3.7
> > test report had only 2 upgrade tests failure both with open tickets).
> Given
> > that we have a known problem during upgrade, I don't really buy the "We
> are
> > assuming these are due to a recent downsize in instance size that these
> > tests run on" and that suggest to me the problem is not too minor.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Dave Brosius 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > >
> > > On 07/20/2016 05:48 PM, Michael Shuler wrote:
> > >
> > >> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
> > >>
> > >> sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c
> > >> Git:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> > >> Artifacts:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> > >> Staging repository:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/
> > >>
> > >> The debian packages are available here:
> > >> http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/
> > >>
> > >> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> > >>
> > >> [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)
> > >> [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)
> > >> [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Ellis
> Project Chair, Apache Cassandra
> co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
> @spyced
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Jonathan Ellis]

I see the alternatives as:

1. Release this as 3.8
2. Skip 3.8 and release 3.9 next month on schedule
3. Skip this month and release 3.8 next month instead


On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko 
wrote:

> I still think the issue is minor enough, and with 3.8 being extremely
> delayed, and being a non-odd release, at that, we’d be better off just
> pushing it.
>
> Also, I know we’ve been easy on -1s when voting on releases, but I want to
> remind people in general that release votes can not be vetoed and only
> require a majority of binding votes,
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
>
> --
> AY
>
> On 21 July 2016 at 08:57:22, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com)
> wrote:
>
> Sorry but I'm (binding) -1 on this because of
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12236.
>
> I disagree that knowingly releasing a version that will temporarily break
> in-flight queries during upgrade, even if it's for a very short time-frame
> until re-connection, is ok. I'll note in particular that in the test
> report, there is 74! failures in the upgrade tests (for reference the 3.7
> test report had only 2 upgrade tests failure both with open tickets). Given
> that we have a known problem during upgrade, I don't really buy the "We are
> assuming these are due to a recent downsize in instance size that these
> tests run on" and that suggest to me the problem is not too minor.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Dave Brosius 
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> >
> > On 07/20/2016 05:48 PM, Michael Shuler wrote:
> >
> >> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
> >>
> >> sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c
> >> Git:
> >>
> >>
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> >> Artifacts:
> >>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> >> Staging repository:
> >>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/
> >>
> >> The debian packages are available here:
> >> http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/
> >>
> >> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> >>
> >> [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)
> >> [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)
> >> [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)
> >>
> >>
> >
>



-- 
Jonathan Ellis
Project Chair, Apache Cassandra
co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
@spyced

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Aleksey Yeschenko]

I still think the issue is minor enough, and with 3.8 being extremely delayed, 
and being a non-odd release, at that, we’d be better off just pushing it.

Also, I know we’ve been easy on -1s when voting on releases, but I want to 
remind people in general that release votes can not be vetoed and only require 
a majority of binding votes, 
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes

-- 
AY

On 21 July 2016 at 08:57:22, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com) wrote:

Sorry but I'm (binding) -1 on this because of  
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12236.  

I disagree that knowingly releasing a version that will temporarily break  
in-flight queries during upgrade, even if it's for a very short time-frame  
until re-connection, is ok. I'll note in particular that in the test  
report, there is 74! failures in the upgrade tests (for reference the 3.7  
test report had only 2 upgrade tests failure both with open tickets). Given  
that we have a known problem during upgrade, I don't really buy the "We are  
assuming these are due to a recent downsize in instance size that these  
tests run on" and that suggest to me the problem is not too minor.  


On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Dave Brosius   
wrote:  

> +1  
>  
>  
> On 07/20/2016 05:48 PM, Michael Shuler wrote:  
>  
>> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.  
>>  
>> sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c  
>> Git:  
>>  
>> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
>>   
>> Artifacts:  
>>  
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
>>   
>> Staging repository:  
>>  
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/  
>>  
>> The debian packages are available here:  
>> http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/  
>>  
>> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).  
>>  
>> [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)  
>> [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)  
>> [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)  
>>  
>>  
>  

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Sylvain Lebresne]

Sorry but I'm (binding) -1 on this because of
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12236.

I disagree that knowingly releasing a version that will temporarily break
in-flight queries during upgrade, even if it's for a very short time-frame
until re-connection, is ok. I'll note in particular that in the test
report, there is 74! failures in the upgrade tests (for reference the 3.7
test report had only 2 upgrade tests failure both with open tickets). Given
that we have a known problem during upgrade, I don't really buy the "We are
assuming these are due to a recent downsize in instance size that these
tests run on" and that suggest to me the problem is not too minor.


On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Dave Brosius 
wrote:

> +1
>
>
> On 07/20/2016 05:48 PM, Michael Shuler wrote:
>
>> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
>>
>> sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c
>> Git:
>>
>> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
>> Artifacts:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
>> Staging repository:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/
>>
>> The debian packages are available here:
>> http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/
>>
>> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
>>
>> [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)
>> [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)
>> [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)
>>
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Dave Brosius]

+1

On 07/20/2016 05:48 PM, Michael Shuler wrote:

I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.

sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c
Git:
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
Artifacts:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
Staging repository:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/

The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/

The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).

[1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)
[2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)
[3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Robert Stupp]

+1

—
Robert Stupp
@snazy

> On 21 Jul 2016, at 07:48, Michael Shuler  wrote:
> 
> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
> 
> sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c
> Git:
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> Artifacts:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/
> 
> The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/
> 
> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> 
> [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)
> [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)
> [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Josh McKenzie]

+1

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Michael Shuler  wrote:

> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
>
> sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c
> Git:
>
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> Artifacts:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/
>
> The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
>
> [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)
> [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)
> [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Pavel Yaskevich]

+1

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko 
wrote:

> +1
>
> --
> AY
>
> On 20 July 2016 at 22:48:09, Michael Shuler (mshu...@apache.org) wrote:
>
> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
>
> sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c
> Git:
>
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> Artifacts:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/
>
> The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
>
> [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)
> [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)
> [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)
>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Aleksey Yeschenko]

+1

-- 
AY

On 20 July 2016 at 22:48:09, Michael Shuler (mshu...@apache.org) wrote:

I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.  

sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c  
Git:  
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
  
Artifacts:  
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
  
Staging repository:  
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/  

The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/  

The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).  

[1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)  
[2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)  
[3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)  

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Jake Luciani]

+1

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Brandon Williams  wrote:

> +1
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Michael Shuler 
> wrote:
>
> > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
> >
> > sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c
> > Git:
> >
> >
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> > Artifacts:
> >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> > Staging repository:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/
> >
> > The debian packages are available here:
> http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/
> >
> > The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> >
> > [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)
> > [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)
> > [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)
> >
>



-- 
http://twitter.com/tjake

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

[Brandon Williams]

+1

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Michael Shuler  wrote:

> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8.
>
> sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c
> Git:
>
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative
> Artifacts:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/
> Staging repository:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/
>
> The debian packages are available here: http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
>
> [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt)
> [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt)
> [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary)
>