There is an issue that Jeff E will take care of later this week that is a showstopper.
Also Dan was going to look into seeing if we needed more post install/postgres fixes back ported to 2.0.x so it could be useful. —Eric > On May 17, 2017, at 11:02 AM, Dave Neuman <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey All, > We had some great discussion about the 2.0 release at the summit, I was > wondering if anyone had a summary of that discussion and a list of what's > left to do that could be added to this thread? I think we discussed that > we were going to take another look at 2.0 and see if it is a viable release > that we should move forward with, is that everyone else's understanding as > well? > Does anyone know of any showstopper issues that still exist? > > Thanks, > Dave > > On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 9:19 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri) < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Update: >> - License issue has been fixed- Thanks Rob! >> - Postinstall script is broken, Jeff and Dan are looking at it. >> >> Once post install is fixed, I will cut an RC >> >> —Eric >> >> >> >>> On Apr 6, 2017, at 2:35 PM, Dewayne Richardson <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Robert Butts <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 >>>> I didn't realize it was new. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Dan Kirkwood <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 7:43 AM, David Neuman <[email protected] >>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Since the Cookie Jar functionality is new to 2.0 and 2.0 is not yet >>>>>> released, why don't we just remove the `ResumeSession` method all >>>>> together >>>>>> and eliminate the dependency? Otherwise we are deprecating something >>>>> that >>>>>> we never formally released. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Robert Butts < >> [email protected] >>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Regarding `TC-119: traffic_ops/client dependency license issue`: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It looks like the persistent cookie jar is only needed by Traffic Ops >>>>>>> Client `ResumeSession(toURL string, insecure bool) (*Session, >> error)`. >>>>>>> Nothing in Traffic Control uses `ResumeSession`, and I doubt anyone >>>>> else is >>>>>>> using it. Because it returns an error, and persisted cookies have >>>>>>> lifetimes, any current users already must handle errors from >> persisted >>>>>>> cookies being expired. Thus, we can change it to always return an >>>> error >>>>>>> with only degraded performance (and not much, login is cheap), >> without >>>>> loss >>>>>>> of functionality. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To fix TC-119, I propose we document `ResumeSession` as deprecated, >>>> and >>>>>>> change it to always return an error, which lets us remove the >>>>> dependency, >>>>>>> without the development cost of writing our own persistent cookie >>>> store >>>>>>> that no one is using. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Any objections? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Jeremy Mitchell < >>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> These all got fixed and backported to 2.0: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> TC-203: Mojo doesn’t set cachable headers on public files” >>>>>>>> TC-190: TTL type mismatch in CrConfig >>>>>>>> TC-189: ssl_multicert.config too slow >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So Jan and Dave just need to close the issues. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 12:22 PM, Jeffrey Martin < >>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Eric, >>>>>>>>> I was going to address the immediate Postinstall issues TC-185. I >>>> am >>>>>>> way >>>>>>>>> late on this. I created a fork yesterday, need to run a couple of >>>>> tests >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>> then I can push to this fork. >>>>>>>>> Jeff Martin >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Eric Friedrich (efriedri) < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> We have some release blockers for 2.0. Specifically: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> TC-119: traffic_ops/client dependency license issue >>>>>>>>>> We cannot ship with Category-X LGPL software, so I’m waiting >>>>> for >>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>> to be resolved before cutting a release branch >>>>>>>>>> "TC-185 post install doesn’t run due to missing perl module” >>>>>>>>>> We shouldn’t ship a release in which the install process is >>>>>>> broken >>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>> this way. >>>>>>>>>> *There’s no assignee yet for this, any volunteers?* >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I think if we can get those two taken care of we can cut an RC0 >>>>> later >>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>> week. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Major bugs we will ship with (unless someone objects): >>>>>>>>>> TC-203: Mojo doesn’t set cachable headers on public files” >>>>>>>>>> TC-190: TTL type mismatch in CrConfig >>>>>>>>>> TC-189: ssl_multicert.config too slow >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> —Eric >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 4, 2017, at 1:13 PM, Dave Neuman <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Good question. I would also like to see us try to get some >>>>> release >>>>>>>>>>> candidates out for 2.0. I am pretty sure the actual install >>>> and >>>>>>>>>>> postinstall need work. There are also a couple of issue that >>>>> are >>>>>>>> still >>>>>>>>>>> assigned to 2.0 and unresolved: >>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TC/fixforversion/ >>>>>>>>>> 12338562/?selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.jira-projects- >>>>>>>>>> plugin:version-summary-panel >>>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 11:05 AM, Jan van Doorn < >>>> [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> When are we planning to release 2.0? We at Comcast are >>>> running >>>>>>> what >>>>>>>> we >>>>>>>>>>>> call 2.0…. So we are +1, I am pretty sure. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Eric: are you waiting for something? Which cats need herding? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Rgds, >>>>>>>>>>>> JvD >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> >>
