Give me until the end of today to have a look at ZK-2247. Rakesh has put the 
effort to prepare the patch, so I'd like to consider it. If it is not ready, 
then let's push it to 3.4.9. Does it sound good, Raul?

-Flavio

> On 29 Jan 2016, at 10:20, Raúl Gutiérrez Segalés <r...@itevenworks.net> wrote:
> 
> Ok - lets punt them to 3.4.9 then.
> 
> 
> -rgs
> 
> On 29 January 2016 at 10:10, Chris Nauroth <cnaur...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> 
>> +1 for expediting the 3.4.8 release.  Our goal was simply to correct the
>> critical bug discovered late in 3.4.7.  Any patches more than that can be
>> deferred to a 3.4.9 at a later date.
>> 
>> --Chris Nauroth
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 1/29/16, 10:06 AM, "Flavio Junqueira" <f...@apache.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> +1
>>> 
>>>> On 29 Jan 2016, at 10:02, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> ZOOKEEPER-2355 is in Open state as of now.
>>>> 
>>>> My two cents:
>>>> 
>>>> 3.4.7 has been retracted.
>>>> It would be nice to get 3.4.8 out the door soon so that zookeeper users
>>>> can
>>>> pick up bug fixes in between 3.4.6 and 3.4 branch.
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Raúl Gutiérrez Segalés
>>>> <r...@itevenworks.net
>>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 28 January 2016 at 07:07, Talluri, Chandra <
>>>>> chandra.tall...@fmr.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks for the updates.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> When can we expect 3.4.8?
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think we need to decide if we want to include these patches:
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2355
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2247
>>>>> 
>>>>> They seem to be almost ready, though there might be some subtleties
>>>>> left to
>>>>> be addressed.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> What are the plans for 3.5.*  stable version release?
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The general plan for making 3.5 stable is here:
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://markmail.org/message/ymxliy2rrwjc2pmo
>>>>> 
>>>>> I believe Chris Nauroth will be the RM for the upcoming 3.5.2 release.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -rgs
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 

Reply via email to