Failing tests 2016-07-27 [cassandra-3.9]

2016-07-27 Thread Josh McKenzie
Multiple reports today that the apache mailing list is Not Impressed with my html formatted email. So plain text it is! Let me know if this one comes through like garbage. testall: All pass! _novnode_dtest: rebuild_test.TestRebuild.simple_rebuild_test CASSANDRA-11678, ymorishita, patc

Re: [VOTE RESULT] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

2016-07-27 Thread Michael Shuler
I apologize for messing this vote up. So, what should happen now? Drop RESULT from the subject and continue discussion 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 > discove

Re: [VOTE RESULT] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

2016-07-27 Thread Jonathan Ellis
You can count me as -1. On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko 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 majority, and the r

Re: [VOTE RESULT] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

2016-07-27 Thread Aleksey Yeschenko
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 discussion was still ongoing, and a decision on the alternative has not been made. As such closing the vote was definitely premature.  FWIW I in

Re: [VOTE RESULT] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

2016-07-27 Thread Pavel Yaskevich
I concur with Sylvain. On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 1:59 AM, Sylvain Lebresne wrote: > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko > 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

Re: [VOTE RESULT] Release Apache Cassandra 3.8

2016-07-27 Thread Sylvain Lebresne
On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko 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 majority, and the required minimum # of +1s