Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 4.1-alpha1

+1 > On 24 May 2022, at 09:38, Mick Semb Wever wrote: > > Proposing the test build of Cassandra 4.1-alpha1 for release. > > sha1: 6f05be447073925a7f3620ddbbd572aa9fcd10ed > Git: > https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/4.1-alpha1-tentative > Maven

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 4.0.3

+1 > On 15 Feb 2022, at 07:49, Marcus Eriksson wrote: > > +1 > > On Sun, Feb 13, 2022 at 11:03:01PM +0100, Mick Semb Wever wrote: >> Proposing the test build of Cassandra 4.0.3 for release. >> >> >> sha1: a87055d56a33a9b17606f14535f48eb461965b82 >> >> Git: >>

Re: [DISCUSS] Disabling MIME-part filtering on this mailing list

Agreed as well. > On 4 Dec 2021, at 23:28, bened...@apache.org wrote: > > I think you were correct to start a DISCUSS thread, Bowen. You should not > start a vote until you have first established if there is consensus. > > Also, I agree with the proposal. > > From: Bowen Song > Date:

Re: [VOTE] CEP-15: General Purpose Transactions

+1 on all points > On 14 Oct 2021, at 17:31, bened...@apache.org wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I would like to start a vote on this CEP, split into three sub-decisions, as > discussion has been circular for some time. > > 1. Do you support adopting this CEP? > 2. Do you support the transaction

Re: [DISCUSS] CEP-15: General Purpose Transactions

Lacking the most basic support for multi-partition transactions is a serious handicap. The CEP offers a concrete solution. It’s possible to solve multi-partition transactions in a myriad of other ways, I’m sure, but CEP-15 is what’s on offer for Cassandra at the moment, and I’m not seeing any

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 4.0.0 (third time is the charm)

+1 > On 23 Jul 2021, at 14:03, Joshua McKenzie wrote: > > +1 > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 8:07 AM Dinesh Joshi > wrote: > >> +1 >> >> >>> On Jul 23, 2021, at 4:56 AM, Paulo Motta >> wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> Em sex., 23 de jul. de 2021 às 08:37, Andrés de la Peña <

Re: [DISCUSS] Virtual Tables and the future of NodeTool/JMX

I would say just go with it. JMX isn’t quite deprecated yet, and if we ever even end up doing that, it’s not going to be any time soon. > On 16 Jul 2021, at 13:32, Stefan Miklosovic > wrote: > > Thanks Benjamin for the understanding, but in the end, let's put aside > the frustration here, I

Re: [DISCUSS] Virtual Tables and the future of NodeTool/JMX

We could eventually make a virtual table only mode to resolve this - not serve any data until a node is ready to do so - if necessary. > On 15 Jul 2021, at 17:43, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > > There's a tactical issue, too, that virtual tables require native transport > to be up before it's usable, so

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 4.0.0 (take2)

+1 > On 14 Jul 2021, at 15:37, Jonathan Ellis wrote: > > +1 > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 5:14 PM Mick Semb Wever wrote: > >> Proposing the test build of Cassandra 4.0.0 for release. >> >> sha1: 924bf92fab1820942137138c779004acaf834187 >> Git: >>

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 4.0-rc2

+1 > On 28 Jun 2021, at 14:05, Gary Dusbabek wrote: > > +1; yay! > > On Sun, Jun 27, 2021 at 11:02 AM Mick Semb Wever wrote: > >> Proposing the test build of Cassandra 4.0-rc2 for release. >> >> sha1: 4c98576533e1d7663baf447e8877788096489165 >> Git: >> >>

Re: Additions to Cassandra ecosystem page?

+1 > On 24 Jun 2021, at 10:22, Sam Tunnicliffe wrote: > > +1 > >> On 23 Jun 2021, at 22:31, Jeff Jirsa wrote: >> >> This would be my preference. >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 2:22 PM Ben Bromhead wrote: >> >>> I'm also comfortable with a strict approach where we just list actual >>>

Re: [CVE-2020-17516] Apache Cassandra internode encryption enforcement vulnerability

Correction: 3.11.x users should upgrade to 3.11.10. 3.11.24 doesn’t exist. Yet. > On 1 Feb 2021, at 18:22, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: > > CVE-2020-17516: Apache Cassandra doesn't enforce encryption setting on > inbound internode connections > > Severity: > Important >

[CVE-2020-17516] Apache Cassandra internode encryption enforcement vulnerability

CVE-2020-17516: Apache Cassandra doesn't enforce encryption setting on inbound internode connections Severity: Important Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation Versions Affected: Cassandra 2.1.0 to 2.1.22 Cassandra 2.2.0 to 2.2.19 Cassandra 3.0.0 to 3.0.23 Cassandra 3.11.0 to 3.11.9

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.11.10

+1 > On 29 Jan 2021, at 14:30, Ekaterina Dimitrova wrote: > > +1(nb) > > On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 8:04, Mick Semb Wever wrote: > >>> >>> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed). Everyone who has >>> tested the build is invited to vote. Votes by PMC members are considered >>>

Stabilising Internode Messaging in 4.0

I would like to propose CASSANDRA-15066 [1] - an important set of bug fixes and stability improvements to internode messaging code that Benedict, I, and others have been working on for the past couple of months. First, some context. This work started off as a review of CASSANDRA-14503

Re: Revisit the proposal to use github PR

There are some nice benefits to GH PRs, one of them is that we could eventually set up CircleCI hooks that would explicitly prevent commits that don’t pass the tests. But handling multiple branches would indeed be annoying. Would have to either submit 1 PR per branch - which is both tedious

Re: UDF

, 2018 at 10:27 AM Aleksey Yeschenko > wrote: > >> If this is about inclusion in 4.0, then I support it. >> >> Technically this is *mostly* just a move+donation of some code from >> java-driver to Cassandra. Given how important this seemingly is

Re: UDF

If this is about inclusion in 4.0, then I support it. Technically this is *mostly* just a move+donation of some code from java-driver to Cassandra. Given how important this seemingly is to the board and PMC for us to not have the dependency on the driver, the sooner it’s gone, the better. I’d

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.17 (Take 2)

+1 — AY On 25 July 2018 at 08:47:40, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.17. sha1: d52c7b8c595cc0d06fc3607bf16e3f595f016bb6 Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.0.17-tentative

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.2.13

+1 — AY On 25 July 2018 at 08:49:15, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.2.13. sha1: 3482370df5672c9337a16a8a52baba53b70a4fe8 Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/2.2.13-tentative

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.11.3 (Take 2)

+1 — AY On 25 July 2018 at 20:14:08, Jonathan Haddad (j...@jonhaddad.com) wrote: +1 On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:35 AM Jeff Jirsa wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:16 AM, Michael Shuler > wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.11.3. > > > >

Re: [RESULT][VOTE] Ask Infra to move github notification emails to pr@

+1 — AY On 28 July 2017 at 11:47:29, Stefan Podkowinski (s...@apache.org) wrote: Can we forward notifications for the new cassandra-dtest repo there as well? On 24.03.2017 18:59, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > With 6 binding +1s, 6 non-binding +1s, and no -1s of any kind, the vote > passes, I'll ask

Re: Integrating vendor-specific code and developing plugins

I’m with Sylvain on this for essentially same reasons. If we need to improve our extensibility here, we should do that, and then have niche platform specific code be an external plug-in (and add a link to the plug-in to our docs, to promote it). --  AY On 12 May 2017 at 12:36:33, Sylvain

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.13

+1 --  AY On 11 April 2017 at 19:59:32, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.13. sha1: 91661ec296c6d089e3238e1a72f3861c449326aa Git:

Re: unsubscribe

Unsubscribe applications rejected, sorry. --  AY On 10 April 2017 at 14:10:05, Sara Prokop (sara.pro...@g2-ops.com) wrote: Unsubscribe Sara Prokop G2 Ops, Inc. Office: 757-330-0372 205 Business Park Drive, Suite 200 Virginia Beach, VA, 23462 This email and any files

Re: [VOTE] self-assignment of jira tickets

+1 super binding. --  AY On 29 March 2017 at 16:22:03, Jason Brown (jasedbr...@gmail.com) wrote: Hey all, Following up my thread from a week or two ago ( https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0665f40c7213654e99817141972c003a2131aba7a1c63d6765db75c5@%3Cdev.cassandra.apache.org%3E), I'd

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.12

+1 --  AY On 7 March 2017 at 16:15:32, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.12. This release addresses a possible 2.1->3.0 upgrade issue[3], along with a few fixes committed since 3.0.11. sha1:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.11

+1 --  AY On 16 February 2017 at 01:15:46, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.11. sha1: 338226e042a22242645ab54a372c7c1459e78a01 Git:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.1.17

+1 --  AY On 16 February 2017 at 01:16:59, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.1.17. sha1: 943db2488c8b62e1fbe03b132102f0e579c9ae17 Git:

Re: MV improvements

To some extent it’s fluid. For outright MV bugs (correctness, severe performance issues), 3.11 would still be allowed. Unless the change set touches too much code and is deemed to be potentially destabilising. I would recommend starting all the work on trunk, and on case-by-case basis (think

Re: cassandra-3.X branch, 3.x version, cleanup

%20currentUser())) --  AY On 5 February 2017 at 17:47:33, Aleksey Yeschenko (alek...@apache.org) wrote: HI all. Now that 3.10 has finally been released, I’ve cleaned up several things, as promised: 1. Cherry-picked bug fixes from cassandra-3.X branch into cassandra-3.11 branch 2. Fixed up

cassandra-3.X branch, 3.x version, cleanup

HI all. Now that 3.10 has finally been released, I’ve cleaned up several things, as promised: 1. Cherry-picked bug fixes from cassandra-3.X branch into cassandra-3.11 branch 2. Fixed up CHANGES.txt in both cassandra-3.11 branch and trunk 3. Dropped cassandra-3.X branch altogether 4. Added

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.10 (Take 5)

+1 --  AY On 31 January 2017 at 21:29:32, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.10. sha1: 3cf415279c171fe20802ad90f181eed7da04c58d Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.10-tentative

Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze

fixversions when 3.10 gets released. Thank you. --  AY On 14 January 2017 at 21:35:35, Nate McCall (zznat...@gmail.com) wrote: +1 Thanks for bringing this up. On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 6:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi all! > > It seems like

Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze

also I appreciate any effort on MV stability. It is an official 3.x feature but not production ready for the masses. Am 13.01.2017 18:34 schrieb "Jonathan Ellis" <jbel...@gmail.com>: > +1 > > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apach

Re: [VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze

suggest we kill off the 3.X branch, and cherry-pick the bug fixes that made it to 3.X back to the 3.11 branch. 3.11 branch will be the only one remaining. https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/cassandra-3.X/CHANGES.txt  --  AY On 13 January 2017 at 17:21:22, Aleksey Yeschenko (alek

[VOTE] 3.X branch feature freeze

Hi all! It seems like we have a general consensus on ending tick-tock at 3.11, and moving on to stabilisation-only for 3.11.x series. In light of this, I suggest immediate feature freeze in the 3.X branch. Meaning that only bug fixes go to the 3.11/3.X branch from now on. All new features

Re: Per blockng release on dtest

That’s a good point. So 3.11 after 3.10, then move on to 3.11.x further bug fix releases? +1 to that. --  AY On 10 January 2017 at 17:22:09, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: I had the same thought. 3.10 is the tick, so a 3.11 bugfix tock follows the intended final fix release

Re: Per blockng release on dtest

I would personally favour pushing 3.10 out without waiting for the pretty innocent #13113 resolution. With the amount of bug fixes accumulated in the 3.X branch it’s borderline irresponsible to not release them out to the users. --  AY On 10 January 2017 at 17:05:57, Michael Shuler

Re: Wrapping up tick-tock

from now on. You thinking monthly release on that or "as needed"? In theory, monthly should be easier than previous tick-tock if we're only putting in bugfix or testfix on the branch. On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> wrote: &g

Re: Wrapping up tick-tock

6 months seems reasonable to me as well. There seems to be an agreement to halting 3.X on 3.10. I would also propose we move on to 3.10.x bugfix only releases from now on, with all new feature development moving to trunk from now on. This should allow us to finally stabilise 3.X so that we can

Re: Per blockng release on dtest

If they aren’t regressions from 3.9, we should still push 3.10 out. The branch has accumulated a lot of fixes, for problems that *are* real. Just have a look at CHANGES.txt. By holding 3.10 you are denying those (arguably few, but still) users fixes for bugs that we know are in. It’s been more

Re: Configurable password policy in Cassandra...

You can write a patch for one, or create a custom authenticator implementation that would enforce this. They are pluggable after all, just like authorizer is. --  AY On 23 December 2016 at 20:06:19, Prakash Chauhan (prakash.chau...@ericsson.com) wrote: Hello All, In Apache Cassandra ,

Re: Where do I find EverywhereStrategy?

It isn’t, but you are supposed to change it. The reason it cannot be set higher by default is that out of the box single-node clusters should still work, and setting the default RF to higher than 1 would break this, as it performs some queries at quorum CL. --  AY On 3 December 2016 at

Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0

I’ll comment on the broader issue, but right now I want to elaborate on 3.11/January/arbitrary cutoff date. Doesn’t matter what the original plan was. We should continue with 3.X until all the 4.0 blockers have been committed - and there are quite a few of them remaining yet. So given all the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.10 (Take 2)

-1 for the reasons listed. — AY On 11 November 2016 at 16:59:04, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: For the record, I'm changing my vote to a -1, as well. -- Michael On 11/11/2016 09:40 AM, Michael Shuler wrote: > I think cassandra-3.0 HEAD is good with me, too. We can

Re: Broader community involvement in 4.0 (WAS Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

Agreed. --  AY On 7 November 2016 at 16:38:07, Jeff Jirsa (jeff.ji...@crowdstrike.com) wrote: ‘Accepted’ JIRA status seems useful, but would encourage something more explicit like ‘Concept Accepted’ or similar to denote that the concept is agreed upon, but the actual patch itself may not be

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

I’d say they are interwoven with inappropriate passages that should have never been typed, and *all of them* came from ASF board members. I feel like it would be in the interest of Apache Cassandra, and the greater Apache community, to expose the way the board treats its volunteer PMC and

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

I have a feeling that you didn’t even bother to check out the mailing list threads that Łukasz linked to. I encourage you, and others, to first do so, instead of blindly assuming that their content is inappropriate. --  AY On 5 November 2016 at 00:14:42, Chris Mattmann (mattm...@apache.org)

Re: DataStax role in Cassandra and the ASF

You got this one completely wrong, my friend. It’s the PMC who reached out to stratio and helped them get the changes they required into Cassandra, so that they could abandon the fork. I know because I was that PMC member. cc Andres from Stratio --  AY On 5 November 2016 at 00:14:42, Chris

Re: Broader community involvement in 4.0 (WAS Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

Dunno. A sneaky correctness or data corruption bug. A performance regression. Or something that can take a node/cluster down. Of course no process is bullet-proof. The purpose of review is to minimise the odds of such a thing happening. I’m sure users running Cassandra in production would

Re: Broader community involvement in 4.0 (WAS Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

of patches to stay in unreviewed limbo for the most part. But significant work will still get reviewed and committed, keeping the project overall healthy. I wouldn’t worry much. --  AY On 4 November 2016 at 22:13:42, Aleksey Yeschenko (alek...@apache.org) wrote: This has always been a concern. We’ve

Re: Broader community involvement in 4.0 (WAS Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0)

This has always been a concern. We’ve always had a backlog on unreviewed patches. Reviews (real reviews, not rubber-stamping a +1 formally) are real work, often taking as much work as creating the patch in question. And taking as much expertise (or more). It’s also not ‘fun’ and doesn’t lend

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.10

+1 --  AY On 31 October 2016 at 15:19:00, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.10. sha1: a3828ca8b755fc98799867baf07039f7ff53be05 Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.10-tentative

Re: Proposal - 3.5.1

I’m not sure it makes sense to have separate features/stability releases in that world. 4.0.x will be stable, every 4.x will be a dev release on the road to 5.0. --  AY On 20 October 2016 at 22:43:19, Jeff Jirsa (jji...@apache.org) wrote: On 2016-10-20 14:21 (-0700), Jeremiah Jordan

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.1.16

+1 --  AY On 6 October 2016 at 15:32:46, Gary Dusbabek (gdusba...@gmail.com) wrote: +1 On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 6:09 PM, Michael Shuler wrote: > I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.1.16. > > sha1: 87034cd05964e64c6c925597279865a40a8c152f >

Re: [VOTE] Accept dtests Donation Into Project

+1 --  AY On 30 September 2016 at 19:51:32, Nate McCall (zzn...@apache.org) wrote: I propose we begin the process of accepting the contribution of the dtest codebase (https://github.com/riptano/cassandra-dtest) into the project. Background discussion thread here:

Re: Failing tests 2016-09-28

We had one accidental merge from 3.0 into 3.9 (looking at you, you know who you are), so could be. --  AY On 28 September 2016 at 17:48:27, Philip Thompson (philip.thomp...@datastax.com) wrote: That ticket was only supposed to be committed to 3.10 and 3.0.x. Was it accidentally also merged

Re: Create table with ID - Question

No way to do that via Thrift I’m afraid, nor will there be one. Sorry. --  AY On 28 September 2016 at 16:43:58, Roman Bielik (roman.bie...@openmindnetworks.com) wrote: Hi, in CQL it is possible to create a table with explicit ID: CREATE TABLE ... WITH ID='xyz'. Is something like this

Re: A home for 4.0

WFM --  AY On 27 September 2016 at 11:18:33, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com) wrote: We have a number of tickets that we now have to wait on 4.0 due to needing a messaging protocol change or major sstable format (https://goo.gl/OvqNQp), and we currently have no branch for those.

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

+1 --  AY On 26 September 2016 at 15:52:26, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8. sha1: ce609d19fd130e16184d9e6d37ffee4a1ebad607 Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative

Re: cassandra-3.9 (and 3.8) release

among PMCs. If something changed, it’ll be reflected in the vote. --  AY On 23 September 2016 at 21:39:09, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: Jonathan's is a pretty compelling perspective. -- Michael On 09/23/2016 07:04 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: > Both are effectively

Re: cassandra-3.9 (and 3.8) release

se builds and start votes, first thing Monday > morning, unless I find some time on Sunday. > > -- > Michael > > On 09/23/2016 05:15 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: > > Branch 3.8 off 3.9 with a commit that only changes the version in all > appropriate places.

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.2.8

+1 --  AY On 23 September 2016 at 16:04:58, Michael Shuler (mshu...@apache.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.2.8. sha1: e9fe96f404b6a936ac5dbceb8f3934fe0d098a97 Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/2.2.8-tentative

Re: cassandra-3.9 (and 3.8) release

Branch 3.8 off 3.9 with a commit that only changes the version in all appropriate places. Two separate votes works. --  AY On 23 September 2016 at 12:36:54, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: The cassandra-3.9 branch HEAD, commit bb371ea, looks good to release (which will also

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.9

+1 --  AY On 15 September 2016 at 11:58:24, Jake Luciani (j...@apache.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.9. sha1: d600f51ee1a3eb7b30ce3c409129567b70c22012 Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.0.9-tentative

Re: in-tree 'Cassandra Development' docs

Can’t really forcefully assign work, including review work, to volunteers. So I’m not sure what we can do here, other than perhaps create some sort of dashboard to show tickets with unassigned reviewers, and tickets with overdue reviews. Both can be easily done as JIRA filters, however. As an

Re: Github pull requests

Also, Github’s ability to modify files ‘in-place’ and create pull requests from those changes is extremely important for our Docs progress. Now that we have proper in-tree documentation, this would lower the barrier for Docs writers tremendously. --  AY On 26 August 2016 at 17:15:54, Jake

Re: Github pull requests

Mark, I, for one, will be happy with the level of GitHub integration that Spark has, formal or otherwise. As it stands right now, none of the committers/PMC members have any control over Cassandra Github mirror. Which, among other things, means that we cannot even close the erroneously opened

Re: 3.8/3.9 releases/branch freeze, current merge order

No worries. It was a somewhat.. messy thread. And it’s taken us a while to get the tests to this level, so it’s somewhat far away in time in the past. --  AY On 24 August 2016 at 20:43:39, Mark Thomas (ma...@apache.org) wrote: On 24/08/2016 20:26, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: > No. Remov

Re: 3.8/3.9 releases/branch freeze, current merge order

No. Removing a dead branch is just mindless admin work. As for 3.8/3.9 plans, look up the previous quite lengthy vote discussion on 3.8, on dev. --  AY On 24 August 2016 at 20:23:04, Mark Thomas (ma...@apache.org) wrote: On 24/08/2016 16:44, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: > Also, cassan

Re: 3.8/3.9 releases/branch freeze, current merge order

Correction: s/12528/11195/g. I’m an idiot who cannot copy-paste. Also, cassandra-3.8 branch was removed from the repo, to further minimise confusion. --  AY On 24 August 2016 at 16:25:21, Aleksey Yeschenko (alek...@apache.org) wrote: TL;DR: cassandra-3.8 branch is dead; cassandra-3.9

3.8/3.9 releases/branch freeze, current merge order

TL;DR: cassandra-3.8 branch is dead; cassandra-3.9 is frozen, unless you are committing the fix for #12140 or #12528. For everything else go cassandra-3.0 -> trunk. There has been some confusion regarding the current branch merge order that I’d like to clarify. As you’ve seen from Joel’s last

Re: 3.8, 3.9 release plan

No objections, the plan sounds good to me. In addition to that, prep for pushing 3.0.9 out with 3.9. --  AY On 16 August 2016 at 16:51:24, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote: Yesterday, it was suggested on #cassandra-dev that when 3.9 is ready for release, we release 3.8 with the

Re: A proposal to move away from Jira-centric development

. In fact, I don’t see JIRA sent to the dev list at all so you are basically forking the conversation to a high noise list by putting it all in JIRA. On 8/15/16, 10:11 AM, "Aleksey Yeschenko" <alek...@apache.org> wrote: I too feel like it would be sufficient to announce t

Re: A proposal to move away from Jira-centric development

I too feel like it would be sufficient to announce those major JIRAs on the dev@ list, but keep all discussion itself to JIRA, where it belongs. You don’t need to follow every ticket this way, just subscribe to dev@ and then start watching the select major JIRAs you care about. --  AY On 15

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Let me sum up my thoughts so far. > > > > Some of the most important goals of tick-tock were 1) predictable, > regular > > releases with manageable cha

Re: [VOTE RESULT] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

of alternatives and voting? -- Kind regards, Michael On 07/27/2016 06:33 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: > The difference is that those -1s were based on new information > discovered after the vote was started, while this one wasn’t. > > In addition to that, the discussi

Re: [VOTE RESULT] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

intended to swap my +1 with a -1, but was not given a chance to do so. As for what alternative I prefer, I’m not sure yet. --  AY On 27 July 2016 at 09:59:50, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com) wrote: On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org>

Re: [VOTE RESULT] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> wrote: > Sorry, but I’m counting 3 binding +1s and 1 binding -1 (2, if you > interpret Jonathan’s emails as such). > > Thus, if you were to do close the vote now, the vote is passing with the > binding major

Re: [VOTE RESULT] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

and fix this before releasing, and to > avoid a super compressed 3.9 window either retarget 3.8 for August, or 3.9 > for September. > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> What we’d usually do is reve

Re: Blockers for 4.0

We don’t need to block 4.0 on #8110. What we need is to block those sstable-format related tickets on *either* #8110 *or* 4.0. #8110 itself can go anywhere in 3.x or 4.x. --  AY On 21 July 2016 at 15:38:58, Jason Brown (jasedbr...@gmail.com) wrote: Sylvain, In the large, yes, that is the

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

users, but also knowing that 2. has the small advantage of keeping the 3.0.x and 3.x versions released more or less in lockstep). > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > I still think the issue is minor en

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

I still think the issue is minor enough, and with 3.8 being extremely delayed, and being a non-odd release, at that, we’d be better off just pushing it. Also, I know we’ve been easy on -1s when voting on releases, but I want to remind people in general that release votes can not be vetoed and

Re: Blockers for 4.0

3.10 most likely. --  AY On 21 July 2016 at 01:28:13, Jake Luciani (jak...@gmail.com) wrote: Will that be in 3.x or 4?

Re: Blockers for 4.0

I don’t think so, b/c https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12142  will allow us to develop them incrementally. --  AY On 20 July 2016 at 22:03:37, Jake Luciani (jak...@gmail.com) wrote: Also, anything related to native protocol v5 

Re: Reminder: critical fixes only in 2.1

he patch against "a few hundred of thousands" without. I suppose > one > > could make a case that having repair over-stream by 3 order of magnitude > in > > some case is critical-ish. Note that I wouldn't oppose reverting this > too, > > as it doesn't fully

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

+1 --  AY On 20 July 2016 at 22:48:09, Michael Shuler (mshu...@apache.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8. sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative

Re: Reminder: critical fixes only in 2.1

+1 from me (and I don’t see any resistance to it either). --  AY On 18 July 2016 at 18:36:42, Jonathan Ellis (jbel...@gmail.com) wrote: Except there really wasn't. Patch submitter: "I want this in 2.1." Reviewer: "Okay." That's not exactly the bar we're looking for. To consider a

Re: Blockers for 4.0

I’d strike CASSANDRA-10383 off the list - there is no way it’s a blocker for anything. As for 9424, unless I die unexpectedly *and* nobody else picks up the work, it should be fine for Nov. Don’t see anything missing from the list. --  AY On 20 July 2016 at 15:59:34, Jason Brown

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.8

+1 --  AY On 1 July 2016 at 16:41:00, Jake Luciani (j...@apache.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.8. sha1: 8b21d9e9e975ea07023ae6ec4c04d997006c1a0a Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.0.8-tentative

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.2.7

+1 --  AY On 1 July 2016 at 15:59:02, Jake Luciani (j...@apache.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.2.7. sha1: 092054170ec3daf92ec494a0db295037d3563229 Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/2.2.7-tentative

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.1.15

+1 --  AY On 30 June 2016 at 20:31:11, Jake Luciani (j...@apache.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.1.15. sha1: cb14186f8d6c2d1105a51e409c59a4e424958171 Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/2.1.15-tentative

Re: Schema Disagreement vs Nodetool resetlocalschema

Schema will disagree during the upgrade itself, you can’t really work around it. It will converge once you finish the upgrade, however. --  AY On 20 June 2016 at 04:21:02, Michael Fong (michael.f...@ruckuswireless.com) wrote: Hi, We have recently encountered several schema disagreement

Re: Possible Bug: bucket_low has no effect in STCS

When in doubt, just open a JIRA. Thanks. --  AY On 15 June 2016 at 13:56:24, Anuj Wadehra (anujw_2...@yahoo.co.in.invalid) wrote: Should I raise JIRA ?? Or some develiper with knowledge of STCS could confirm the bug ?? Anuj Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Tue, 14 Jun, 2016 at

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.7

+1 --  AY On 8 June 2016 at 14:21:58, Jake Luciani (j...@apache.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.7. sha1: 6815dc970565e6cd1e0169b5379f37da7a5a8a32 Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.7-tentative Artifacts:

Re: Cassandra Java Driver and DataStax

with the database, because it's the same people developing it. On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 1:06 PM Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> wrote: > An eloquent and powerful response, but please, reply to my points instead > of resorting to ad hominem arguments. > > In practica

Re: Cassandra Java Driver and DataStax

...@carmanconsulting.com) wrote: "Sr. Software Engineer at DataStax", imagine that. On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 1:01 PM Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> wrote: > As a member of that governing body (Cassandra PMC), I would much prefer > not to deal with the drivers as well. >

Re: Cassandra Java Driver and DataStax

As a member of that governing body (Cassandra PMC), I would much prefer not to deal with the drivers as well. And I’m just as certain that java-driver - and other driver communities - would much rather prefer to keep their process and organisation instead of being forced to conform to ours.

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.6 (Attempt #2)

+1 --  AY On 1 June 2016 at 18:30:57, Jake Luciani (j...@apache.org) wrote: I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.6. sha1: 8d22d9fd1842c59ea65a3793aceb5a78c5852351 Git: http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.6-tentative Artifacts:

  1   2   >