Hi Kengo and Masatake, Definitely 3.0.1 is ok! Having new packages out with the log4j fix is enough in my opinion, and then 3.1 can follow later on with more changes.
Thanks! On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 3:33 AM Kengo Seki <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'd also release 3.0.1 based on branch-3.0 first, since 3.1.0 drops Debian > 9 (BIGTOP-3629) but its users may need a patch release for addressing > Log4Shell vulnabilites. > Is it OK for you, Luca? And if it's OK, do you have any fixes to be > included in 3.0.1 (Debian 11 support, for example)? > > Kengo Seki <sekikn@ <[email protected]>apache.org> > > > On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 6:02 PM Masatake Iwasaki < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Luca, > > > > How about releasing 3.0.1 first? > > I think issues under BIGTOP-3613 are landed to both master and branch-3.0. > > > > I want to BIGTOP-3606 be in 3.1, it is not yet resolved. > > After Bigtop 3.0.1, we can release Bigtop 3.1.0 even without BIGTOP-3606. > > If it takes more time in Hadoop side, we can address the Hadoop 3.2.3 in > > Bigtop 3.1.1. > > > > Thanks, > > Masatake Iwasaki > > > > On 2022/02/21 17:08, Luca Toscano wrote: > > > Hi everybody, > > > > > > I am wondering if it would be good to release 3.1 during the coming > > > weeks to address the log4j vulnerabilities. Thoughts? No idea how > > > tough the process is, but I'll help if needed! > > > > > > Luca > >
