+1 for getting Bruc'e's backwards compatibility testing framework in! -Dan
On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Anilkumar Gingade <aging...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Right, to be enterprise class software product, it needs to be backward > compatible...We also need to consider rolling upgrade of the system.... > > Thanks, Dan, Bruce for the write-up and frame-work... > > -Anil. > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 10:37 AM, William Markito Oliveira < > william.mark...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Swapnil Bawaskar <sbawas...@pivotal.io> > > wrote: > > > > > +1 for maintaining backwards compatibility. > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 9:40 AM, Mark Bretl <asf.mbr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 for backward compatibility with Geode releases. > > > > > > > > --Mark > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Kenneth Howe <kh...@pivotal.io> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 to Dan > > > > > +1 to Bruce - the distributedTest extensions for backward > > compatibility > > > > > would great > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 1, 2016, at 4:11 PM, Bruce Schuchardt < > > bschucha...@pivotal.io > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > I still have the backward-compatibility distributedTest > extensions > > > that > > > > > I could contribute. The extension lets you spawn a VM running an > > older > > > > > version and interact with it. You can even run a unit test in the > > > > spawned > > > > > VM. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have one test that sets up a server using the current version > and > > > > then > > > > > spawns a client unit test running under an older version. The > client > > > > finds > > > > > the server through the distributedTest locator and runs its tests > > > against > > > > > the server. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Le 11/1/2016 à 4:04 PM, Jianxia Chen a écrit : > > > > > >> +1 > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >>> Hi, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> We made a lot of changes in 1.0 that broke compatibility with > old > > > > > versions > > > > > >>> of gemfire for various reasons (package renaming, changing > > > membership > > > > > >>> system). I just wanted to confirm that starting with 1.1, we're > > > > > planning on > > > > > >>> maintaining client/server, peer-to-peer, WAN and disk backwards > > > > > >>> compatibility with older versions geode as outlined in this > wiki > > > > page: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/ > > > Managing+Backward+ > > > > > >>> Compatibility > > > > > >>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/ > > > > > >>> Criteria+for+Code+Submissions > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Now that we have 1.0 out the door, we need to be more careful > > about > > > > > >>> introducing changes that might break compatibility if we're > going > > > to > > > > > stick > > > > > >>> to these guidelines. We also probably should introduce some > tests > > > > that > > > > > >>> check compatibility with 1.0. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> -Dan > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > ~/William > > >
