+1 for 1.6.1. There are people testing a recent 1.6 branch at scale (100s of nodes), with the intent of pushing it to production.
I would rather have a released version in production. Thanks for volunteering. Feel free to contact me if you need a hand with anything. -Eric On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: > Sure that's fine, Corey. Happy to help coordinate things with you. > *Hopefully* it's not too painful :) > > > On 9/10/14, 10:43 AM, Corey Nolet wrote: > >> I had posted this to the mailing list originally after a discussion with >> Christopher at the Accumulo Summit hack-a-thon and because I wanted to get >> into the release process to help out. >> >> Josh, I still wouldn't mind getting together 1.6.1 if that's okay with >> you. >> If nothing else, it would get someone else following the procedures and >> able to do the release. >> >> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> That's exactly my plan, Christopher. Keith has been the man working on a >>> fix for ACCUMULO-1628 which is what I've been spinning on to get 1.5.2 >>> out >>> the door. I want to spend a little time today looking at his patch to >>> understand the fix and run some tests myself. Hopefully John can retest >>> the >>> patch as well since he had an environment that could reproduce the bug. >>> >>> Right after we get 1.5.2, I'm happy to work on 1.6.1 as well. >>> >>> - Josh >>> >>> >>> On 9/10/14, 10:04 AM, Christopher wrote: >>> >>> Because of ACCUMULO-2988 (upgrade path from 1.4.x --> 1.6.y, y >= 1), >>>> I'm >>>> hoping we can revisit this soon. Maybe get 1.5.2 out the door, followed >>>> by >>>> 1.6.1 right away. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Christopher L Tubbs II >>>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Keith Turner <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> >>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I was thinking the same thing, but I also haven't made any strides >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> towards >>>>> >>>>> getting 1.5.2 closer to happening (as I said I'd try to do). >>>>>> >>>>>> I still lack "physical" resources to do the week-long testing as our >>>>>> guidelines currently force us to do. I still think this testing is >>>>>> excessive if we're actually releasing bug-fixes, but it does >>>>>> >>>>>> differentiate >>>>> >>>>> us from other communities. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I want to run some CI test because of the changes I made w/ walog. >>>>> I can >>>>> run the test, but I would like to do that as late as possible. Just >>>>> let >>>>> me know when you are thinking of cutting a release. >>>>> >>>>> Also, I would like to get 2827 in for the release. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm really not sure how to approach this which is really why I've been >>>>>> stalling on it. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 6/19/14, 7:18 AM, Mike Drob wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd like to see 1.5.2 released first, just in case there are issues >>>>>> we >>>>>> >>>>>>> discover during that process that need to be addressed. Also, I think >>>>>>> it >>>>>>> would be useful to resolve the discussion surrounding upgrades[1] >>>>>>> before >>>>>>> releasing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [1]: >>>>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/accumulo-dev/ >>>>>>> 201406.mbox/%3CCAGHyZ6LFuwH%3DqGF9JYpitOY9yYDG- >>>>>>> sop9g6iq57VFPQRnzmyNQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Corey Nolet <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd like to start getting a candidate together if there are no >>>>>>> >>>>>>> objections. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It looks like we have 65 resolved tickets with a fix version of >>>>>>>> 1.6.1. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>
