Go for it, Mike! On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 2:52 PM Michael Wall <mjw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just moved the last 2 tickets out of 1.8.0. Both tickets were for > failing ITs. Seems like we are ready now for the release. Anyone > disagree? > > I plan on making an RC tomorrow. I'll start with a RC0 to work out the > process then make an RC1 if that goes smoothly. > > On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 8:57 PM, Michael Wall <mjw...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Didn't get a chance to talk to Christopher so hopefully what I > understood > > > from emails with Josh and him is correct. > > > > > > Moved issues out of 1.8.0. Here is a summary of the fix version > changes > > > > > > 8 issues - 1.7.2, 1.8.0 => 1.7.2, 1.8.1 > > > 9 issues - 1.6.6, 1.7.3, 1.8.0 => 1.6.6, 1.7.3, 1.8.1 > > > 34 issues - 1.7.3, 1.8.0 => 1.7.3, 1.8.1 > > > 102 issues (BUG) - 1.8.0 => 1.8.1 > > > 248 issues (not BUG) - 1.8.0 => 1.9.1 > > > > > > That leaves 3 issues in 1.8.0, I made them blockers > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4157 (WAL can be > > > prematurely deleted) > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4165 (Create a user > > level > > > API for RFile) > > > - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-1124 (optimize index > > size > > > in RFile) > > > > > > Keith has a PR in for 1124. I am looking to put in a PR for 4157 > > > tomorrow/Sat. Keith, if I need to move 4165 to 1.8.1 let me know. > > > > > > > 1124 is merged. 4165 has a PR. I also created a PR for 4318[1]. While > > testing the new RFile API I tried to use try-with-resources with a > scanner > > and found I could not. I think it would be nice to get 4318 into 1.8.0 > > because its a change that can only be made on a minor release. > > > > [1]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO- > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4165>4318 > > > > > > > > > > > > Once those are closed/moved, I will cut an RC1. > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Michael Wall <mjw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > Christopher, > > > > > > > > I'd like to talk this through with you before I move the tickets to > > make > > > > sure I understand what you are saying here. > > > > > > > > Thanks for the note, it is helpful. > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 9:42 PM Michael Wall <mjw...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > After last weeks discussion with Josh, Christopher and others at > the > > > >> > Accumulo Working Day, I am going to shepherd the 1.8 release. > First > > > >> step > > > >> > is to create a release candidate? Before I do that, are there any > > > >> tickets > > > >> > that need to get into the release? I know Keith mentioned 1 or 2 > > and > > > I > > > >> > have one I'd like to finish. > > > >> > > > > >> > Here is what Jira says is unresolved, > > > >> > https://s.apache.org/accumulo-1.8-unresolved > > > >> > > > > >> > On Wed I would like to move all tickets not identified for the 1.8 > > > >> release > > > >> > to 2.0. Then on Friday I would like to cut the first release > > > candidate > > > >> for > > > >> > 1.8. Is that enough time? Anything I am missing? > > > >> > > > > >> > Thanks > > > >> > > > > >> > Mike > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> I think it's probably time. I don't know that I'd bump the stuff to > > 2.0. > > > >> I'd rather bump it to 1.9, just because we've been on a roll with > this > > > >> backwards compatibility thing, and I think there's probably ongoing > > > demand > > > >> for updated 1.x versions. > > > >> > > > >> I'll try to go through the issues I've created (or have assigned to > > me) > > > >> and > > > >> bump them myself. So, if you could hold off on that for a few more > > days, > > > >> it > > > >> would help. > > > >> > > > >> Also, keep in mind, if you do bump using JIRAs batch features, > you've > > > got > > > >> to do it multiple times, depending on if they have more than one > > > >> fixVersion > > > >> on them, otherwise you'll overwrite the multiple versions with a > > single > > > >> one > > > >> (or vice versa). > > > >> > > > >> Eg. > > > >> (1.6.6, 1.7.2, 1.8.0) -> (1.6.6, 1.7.2, 1.8.1) // should just be bug > > > fixes > > > >> (1.7.2, 1.8.0) -> (1.7.2, 1.8.1) // should just be bug fixes > > > >> (1.8.0) -> (1.8.1 or 1.9.0) // depends on if bugfix or feature > > addition > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
