Oh ok I thought I read that voting was going to start soon, so I thought
I'd raise a concern about the tickets not being fixed yet.

I meant this ticket https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-6359  This
seems like a bad thing to have in the product.  It looks like a possible
issue when processLeaveRequests.  I think the fix would be to just copy the
list or not log the list of members.



On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 5:35 PM Sai Boorlagadda <sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> GEODE-6404 can be cherry-picked when it is ready.
> The release branch is cut to avoid any risk of regression that
> can be introduced by new work being merged to develop.
>
> Do you mean GEODE-6369?
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:50 PM Jason Huynh <jhu...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > Correction, GEODE-6359 and GEODE-6404.
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 4:49 PM Jason Huynh <jhu...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> > > I still haven't gotten GEODE-6404 in... I assumed that the tickets from
> > > the last thread were going to make it into this release?
> > >
> > > Also I think GEODE-6539 should be fixed, it looks like an NPE that
> occurs
> > > when we process leave requests.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 2:25 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
> > sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> My earlier release branch has created as 'release/1.9' without the
> patch
> > >> number in semver.
> > >> So I have re-created a new release branch 'release/1.9.0'.
> > >>
> > >> I will go ahead delete the unwanted branch 'release/1.9'
> > >>
> > >> Sai
> > >> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 2:17 PM Sai Boorlagadda <
> > >> sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hello Everyone,
> > >> >
> > >> > As discussed in my earlier email I have created a new release branch
> > >> for Apache Geode 1.9.0 - "release/1.9"
> > >> >
> > >> > Please do review and raise any concern with the release branch.
> > >> > If no concerns are raised, we will start with the voting for the
> > >> release candidate soon.
> > >> >
> > >> > Regards
> > >> > Sai
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to