I think you're talking about porting the patch of ZK-2125. I haven't really assessed how much work it would be to backport it, but it is possibly not hard.
-Flavio > On 01 Jul 2016, at 15:54, Luciano Afranllie <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Flavio > > What about back porting in our own private fork while we wait for the 3.5? > I would like your help understanding how easy/difficult this may be. > > Regards > Luciano > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:23 AM, Flavio Junqueira <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Luciano, >> >> The 3.4 branch is stable and we are only releasing bug fixes at this >> point, so it is currently not an option to back port. >> >> We are all pretty eager to see the 3.5 branch stable, and we are in the >> process of voting the release candidate for 3.5.2, but that's still tagged >> as alpha. We don't have a current plan for 3.5.3 yet, but I believe no one >> here wants to wait too long have it out. I suspect that it won't be before >> 3 months from now given the pace that we have been releasing, though. >> >> -Flavio >> >> >>> On 01 Jul 2016, at 13:07, Luciano Afranllie <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi there >>> >>> We are in the need to have SSL support in Zookeeper in order for our >>> solution to be FIPS complaint. >>> >>> Of course one option is to wait for 3.5 to be released but given we are a >>> little bit time constrained we want to consider an alternative of >>> backporting SSL support from 3.5 to 3.4 (we are using 3.4.8) >>> >>> Do you think this is doable? Can you please tell me the impact of doing >>> this and if you think it is a viable alternative? We have experience with >>> Java but not with ZK at development level. >>> >>> Of, course if you have a rough estimate about when ZK 3.5 may be released >>> that may help in our decision too. >>> >>> Regards >>> Luciano >> >>
