What you are suggesting isn archival of the release, which means removing it from the downloads page, the distribution directory, and the mirrors. I can do this, but I'd like to know that we have consensus first. The plan as I understood it was to archive this release at the same time as making the 1.0.1 release.
On 8 Aug 2010, at 20:21, Robert Dionne wrote: > I would also consider removing the download link for 1.0.0 and not depend on > users patching it. It's broken. > > I have to believe there are users who won't and who won't read the red sign. > There's a good probability these are the kinds of users who will also be the > most upset by data loss > > > > > On Aug 8, 2010, at 3:06 PM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: > >> >> On 8 Aug 2010, at 18:37, J Chris Anderson wrote: >> >>> Devs, >>> >>> I have started a document which we will use when announcing the bug. I plan >>> to move the document from this wiki location to the >>> http://couchdb.apache.org site before the end of the day. Please review and >>> edit the document before then. >>> >>> http://wiki.couchone.com/page/post-mortem >>> >>> I have a section called "The Bug" which needs a technical description of >>> the error and the fix. I'm hoping Adam or Randall can write this, as they >>> are most familiar with the issues. >>> >>> Once it is ready, we should do our best to make sure our users get a chance >>> to read it. >> >> I made a few more minor adjustments (see page history when you are logged >> in) and have nothing more to add myself, but I'd appreciate if Adam or >> Randall could add a few more tech bits. >> >> -- >> >> In the meantime, I've put up a BIG FAT WARNING on the CouchDB downloads >> page: >> >> http://couchdb.apache.org/downloads.html >> >> I plan to update the warning with a link to the post-mortem once that is >> done. >> >> -- >> >> Thanks everybody for being on top of this! >> >> Cheers >> Jan >> -- >> >> >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Chris >>> >>> On Aug 8, 2010, at 5:16 AM, Robert Newson wrote: >>> >>>> That was also Adam's conclusion (data loss bug confined to 1.0.0). >>>> >>>> B. >>>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 8 Aug 2010, at 13:48, Noah Slater wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Do we need to abort 0.11.2 as well? >>>>> >>>>> 0.11.x does not have this commit as far as I can see. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>>> Jan >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 8 Aug 2010, at 11:45, Jan Lehnardt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 8 Aug 2010, at 06:35, J Chris Anderson wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Aug 7, 2010, at 8:45 PM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> is this serious enough to justify pulling current 1.0.0 release >>>>>>>>> binaries to avoid further installs putting data at risk? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm not sure what Apache policy is about altering a release after the >>>>>>>> fact. It's probably up to use to decide what to do. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Altering releases are a no-no. The only real procedure is to release a >>>>>>> new version and deprecate the old one, while optionally keeping it >>>>>>> around for posterity. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Probably as soon as 1.0.1 is available we should pull the 1.0.0 >>>>>>>> release off of the downloads page, etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +1. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I also think we should do a post-mortem blog post announcing the issue >>>>>>>> and the remedy, as well as digging into how we can prevent this sort >>>>>>>> of thing in the future. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We should make an official announcement before the end of the weekend, >>>>>>>> with very clear steps to remedy it. (Eg: config delayed_commits to >>>>>>>> false *without restarting the server* etc) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think so, too. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>> Jan >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 8 August 2010 15:08, Randall Leeds <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Yes. Adam already back ported it. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Sent from my interstellar unicorn. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Aug 7, 2010 8:03 PM, "Noah Slater" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Time to abort the vote then? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'd like to get this fix into 1.0.1 if possible. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 8 Aug 2010, at 02:28, Damien Katz wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Anyone up to create a repair tool for w... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> >
