Thanks for the feedback Aleksey. I switched the fix version for CASSANDRA-16619 back to 4.0.
Le jeu. 22 avr. 2021 à 18:25, Aleksey Yeshchenko <alek...@apple.com.invalid> a écrit : > I believe we wouldn’t knowingly ship a release with [CASSANDRA-16619 < > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16619 < > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16619>> > Loss of commit log data possible after sstable ingest] in it, so I’d say > at least that one needs to be fixed, even if it isn’t a regression. > > Delaying the rest I don’t mind. > > > On 21 Apr 2021, at 16:52, Benjamin Lerer <ble...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> > >> it would probably help to send the link with the tickets being moved > away > >> from GA so people can take a look more easily? > >> > > > > Good point Paulo. The tickets I moved to 4.0.X are the following. > > > > CASSANDRA-16547 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16547> > > Prioritisation for sized-tier and TW compactions is based on outdated > > estimation > > CASSANDRA-16199 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16199> > > cassandra.logdir undefined when CASSANDRA_LOG_DIR > > CASSANDRA-16619 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16619> > > Loss of commit log data possible after sstable ingest > > CASSANDRA-16592 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16592> > The > > token function in where clause return incorrect data when using token > equal > > condition and Specified a non-exist token value > > > > Le mar. 20 avr. 2021 à 19:56, Paulo Motta <pauloricard...@gmail.com> a > > écrit : > > > >> +1, but it would probably help to send the link with the tickets being > >> moved away from GA so people can take a look more easily? > >> > >> Em ter., 20 de abr. de 2021 às 13:24, Benjamin Lerer <ble...@apache.org > > > >> escreveu: > >> > >>> Hi everybody, > >>> > >>> I had a look at the 4.0 GA tickets remaining and it looks like several > >>> tickets are not 4.0 specific. They are simply bugs that have been > >>> discovered recently (they exist in older releases). > >>> Unless the problem has been introduced in 4.0 or is a critical issue, > it > >>> should probably not be included in 4.0 GA scope. > >>> > >>> I will move those tickets out of the 4.0 GA release and mark them for > >>> 4.0.XFeel > >>> free to raise your voice if you believe that an issue should be part of > >> the > >>> 4.0 GA scope for some specific reasons. > >>> > >> > >
