Done both for 6.6 and 6x On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Ishan Chattopadhyaya < [email protected]> wrote:
> Sure Erick, please go ahead. > I'll start the release later today. > Thanks, > Ishan > > On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 5:44 AM, Erick Erickson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Ishan: >> >> I have 11297 ready to rock-n-roll, it's just a matter of pushing it. Give >> me a few. >> >> The thing I'm not clear on is what to do with CHANGES.txt. Currently it's >> in 7.0.1 and 7.1. >> >> I propose adding a 6.6.2 section to 6x and including it there and leaving >> it in the 7.0.1 and 7.1 sections of master. >> >> I'll do it that way, you can change it if you want unless I hear back >> from you sooner. >> >> Erick >> >> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Allison, Timothy B. <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Sounds good. Thank you! >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Ishan Chattopadhyaya [mailto:[email protected]] >>> *Sent:* Friday, October 13, 2017 5:25 PM >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* Re: 6.6.2 Release >>> >>> >>> >>> > Any chance we could get SOLR-11450 in? I understand if the answer is >>> no. 😊 >>> >>> Currently, I want to have this release out as soon as possible so as to >>> mitigate the risk exposure of the security vulnerability. Since this is not >>> committed yet, I'd vote for leaving this out and possibly having it >>> included in a later release, if needed. >>> >>> +1 to SOLR-11297. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 2:32 AM, David Smiley <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Suggested criteria for bug-fix release issues: >>> >>> * fixes a bug :-) and doesn't harm backwards-compatibility in the >>> process >>> >>> * helps users upgrade to later versions >>> >>> * documentation >>> >>> >>> >>> +1 to SOLR-11297 >>> >>> >>> >>> I'm not sure on SOLR-11450. Seems it might introduce a back-compat >>> issue? >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 4:40 PM Erick Erickson <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I'd also like to get SOLR-11297 in if there are no objections. Ditto if >>> the answer is no.... >>> >>> >>> >>> It's quite a safe fix though. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:26 PM, Allison, Timothy B. <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Any chance we could get SOLR-11450 in? I understand if the answer is >>> no. 😊 >>> >>> >>> >>> Thank you! >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* Ishan Chattopadhyaya [mailto:[email protected]] >>> *Sent:* Friday, October 13, 2017 4:23 PM >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* 6.6.2 Release >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> In light of [0], we need a 6.6.2 release as soon as possible. >>> >>> I'd like to volunteer to RM for this release, unless someone else wants >>> to do so or has an objection. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Ishan >>> >>> >>> >>> [0] - https://lucene.apache.org/solr/news.html#12-october-2017-ple >>> ase-secure-your-apache-solr-servers-since-a-zero-day-explo >>> it-has-been-reported-on-a-public-mailing-list >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Lucene/Solr Search Committer, Consultant, Developer, Author, Speaker >>> >>> LinkedIn: http://linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley | Book: >>> http://www.solrenterprisesearchserver.com >>> >>> >>> >> >> >
