For completeness, Jake and Pavel are the other two.

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org>
wrote:

> Sorry (: Only see yours, Dave’s, and mine in my client. Apparently I’ve
> trashed the email chain at some point.
>
> --
> AY
>
> On 26 July 2016 at 23:48:49, Brandon Williams (dri...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> Small nit: there are currently 5 binding +1 and 1 binding -1, (or 2, with
> Jonathan.)
>
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org>
> 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).
> >
> > --
> > AY
> >
> > On 25 July 2016 at 15:46:40, Michael Shuler (mshu...@apache.org) wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the clarity, Jonathan. I agree that an August 3.8 release
> > target sounds like the most reasonable option, at this point in time.
> >
> > With Sylvain's binding -1, this vote has failed.
> >
> > --
> > Kind regards,
> > Michael Shuler
> >
> > On 07/21/2016 05:33 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> > > I feel like the calendar is relevant though because if we delay 3.8
> more
> > > we're looking at a week, maybe 10 days before 3.9 is scheduled. Which
> > > doesn't give us much time for the stabilizing we're supposed to do in
> > 3.9.
> > >
> > > All in all I think I agree that releasing 3.8 in August is less
> confusing
> > > than skipping it entirely. And I don't like the idea of ignoring a
> whole
> > > bunch of test failures and hoping they don't mean anything, because we
> > just
> > > had that thread about getting more rigorous about tests, not less.
> > >
> > > So I would recommend we go ahead and fix this before releasing, and to
> > > avoid a super compressed 3.9 window either retarget 3.8 for August, or
> > 3.9
> > > for September.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org
> >
> > > 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 <jbel...@gmail.com>
> > 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 <
> alek...@apache.org
> > >
> > >>> 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
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to