Issues that are "not a problem" are essentially no-ops. Including them is not wrong per se, but I'd say it is unnecessary and adds more lines to the release notes. Unless the goal of the release notes is to list the issues we investigated as part of the release, I'd say that going forward we should exclude issues marked as "not a problem".
I don't see the need to -1 the RC2 based on the inclusion of ZK-1676, though. -Flavio > On 29 Aug 2016, at 05:22, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <rake...@apache.org> wrote: > > OK, I got it. Thanks a lot for the clarification. > > Rakesh > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I would say it's acceptable to include 1676 in the release note. IMO we >> shouldn't list things in the release notes if they weren't addressed (typ >> fixed) in that release. However in this case I don't see why it's a very >> big deal - if folks are that interested in the issue they could quickly see >> (by opening the jira) what the resolution was. >> >> Patrick >> >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan <rake...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Patrick, I just referred 3.4.6 release note and I could see >> similar >>> category, ZOOKEEPER-1599 marked resolution as 'Not A Problem' and >> included >>> in 3.4.6 release note. Should we follow the same pattern and >>> include ZOOKEEPER-1676 also in 3.4.9 release note, please correct me if I >>> missed anything. >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa? >>> projectId=12310801&version=12323310 >>> >>> Rakesh >>> >>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:25 AM, Patrick Hunt <phu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan < >>> rake...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks Flavio for taking the discussion ahead. Thanks Michael for >>>> pointing >>>>> out these cases. >>>>> >>>>>>>> Looking at release notes: >>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?p >>>>> rojectId=12310801&version=12334700 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - [ZOOKEEPER-2396 <https://issues.apache.org/jir >>>>> a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2396>] >>>>>>>> - Login object in ZooKeeperSaslClient is static >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9. >> Maybe >>>>> there >>>>>>>> was a mistake on marking the target version as 3.4.9? Should we >>> keep >>>>> this >>>>>>>> in relesae note or remove it? >>>>> >>>>>> It is resolved through a different issue, ZK-2139. I can go either, >>>>> including or excluding it. >>>>> >>>>> I would wait to see others response. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - [ZOOKEEPER-1676 <https://issues.apache.org/jir >>>>> a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1676>] >>>>>>>> - C client zookeeper_interest returning ZOK on Connection Loss >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9 >>> either, >>>> as >>>>>>>> this is closed as 'not a bug'. I'd expect such not a bug issue be >>>>> excluded >>>>>>>> in release notes, as it does not provide any useful information, >>>> though >>>>> I >>>>>>>> am not sure what's the standard practice in previous releases. >>>>> >>>>>> Agreed, better not to include if we classified as not a problem. >>>>> >>>>> I could see 'HowToRelease' page has specifically mentioned the >> excluded >>>>> categories as "Won' fix" and "Invalid" jira resolution. >> ZOOKEEPER-1676 >>>>> comes under 'Not A Problem' category. Perhaps we could revisit the >>>>> classifications and consider more cases like, Not a problem, Cannot >>>>> Reproduce, Not A Bug etc, if everyone thinks so. But I'm not sure how >>>>> updating the excluded category might reflect in our previously >> released >>>>> versions. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Typically I removed the "fixed version" if it's not actually fixed. >> i.e. >>>> "wont fix" means I would clear the "fix version" as part of resolving >> the >>>> issue. >>>> >>>> Patrick >>>> >>>> >>>>> Reference:- >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/ZOOKEEPER/HowToRelease >>> page, >>>>> "Note that you need to exclude the won't fix or invalid tickets." >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Rakesh >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Flavio Junqueira <f...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 27 Aug 2016, at 00:16, Michael Han <h...@cloudera.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Looking at release notes: >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje >>>>>> ctId=12310801&version=12334700 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - [ZOOKEEPER-2396 <https://issues.apache.org/jir >>>>>> a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2396>] >>>>>>> - Login object in ZooKeeperSaslClient is static >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9. >> Maybe >>>>> there >>>>>>> was a mistake on marking the target version as 3.4.9? Should we >>> keep >>>>> this >>>>>>> in relesae note or remove it? >>>>>> >>>>>> It is resolved through a different issue, ZK-2139. I can go either, >>>>>> including or excluding it. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - [ZOOKEEPER-1676 <https://issues.apache.org/jir >>>>>> a/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1676>] >>>>>>> - C client zookeeper_interest returning ZOK on Connection Loss >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is no bits related to this JIRA went to 3.4.9 >>> either, >>>> as >>>>>>> this is closed as 'not a bug'. I'd expect such not a bug issue be >>>>>> excluded >>>>>>> in release notes, as it does not provide any useful information, >>>>> though I >>>>>>> am not sure what's the standard practice in previous releases. >>>>>> >>>>>> Agreed, better not to include if we classified as not a problem. >>>>>> >>>>>> -Flavio >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Abraham Fine < >> a...@abrahamfine.com >>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> shasum and md5sum are valid. PGP signature is valid. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Java unit tests pass and was able to successfully test against >> a 3 >>>>>> server >>>>>>>> ensemble. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Abe >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +1 xsum/sig are valid. RAT ran clean. I was able to compile the >>>> code >>>>>> and >>>>>>>>> successfully put a few ensemble sizes through their paces. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> fwiw I also did a "diff" btw 3.4.8 release artifact and this >> rc. >>>>> There >>>>>>>> were >>>>>>>>> a number of changed files, obviously. However I did not notice >>> any >>>>>>>> missing >>>>>>>>> files, as we've seen with the previous rcs in this release >>>> candidate >>>>>>>> line. >>>>>>>>> afaict this artifact has all the right contents - i.e. similar >> to >>>>>>>> previous >>>>>>>>> releases. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Patrick >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 2:24 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan < >>>>>>>> rake...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is the third release candidate for 3.4.9. This candidate >>>>> removes >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> extra *.asc files found in the >>>>>>>>>> second candidate. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is a bugfix release candidate for 3.4.9. It fixes 21 >>> issues, >>>>>>>> including >>>>>>>>>> issues that affect ACL cache >>>>>>>>>> in DataTree never removes entries, prevent multiple init of >>> login >>>>>>>> object in >>>>>>>>>> each ZKSaslClient instance, >>>>>>>>>> ZK service becomes unavailable when leader fails to write >>>>> transaction >>>>>>>> log, >>>>>>>>>> upgrade netty version due >>>>>>>>>> to security vulnerability (CVE-2014-3488) and others. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The full release notes are available at: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa? >>>>>>>>>> projectId=12310801&version=12334700 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *** Please download, test and vote by August 30th 2016, 23:59 >>>> UTC+0. >>>>>> *** >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Source files: >>>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~rakeshr/zookeeper-3.4.9-candidate-2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Maven staging repo: >>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/ >>>>>>>>>> apache/zookeeper/zookeeper/3.4.9 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The tag to be voted upon: >>>>>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/zookeeper/tags/release-3. >>> 4.9-rc2 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ZooKeeper's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the >>>>> release: >>>>>>>>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/zookeeper/KEYS >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Should we release this candidate? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Rakesh >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>> Michael. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>
