Re: PR process and etiquette

+1 to your idea of using "draft" mode until things are green. Something to be aware of is that if your pr branch has conflicts and it is in draft mode then your pr tests will not run and the pr page will not tell you that conflicts exist. If you see that the pr tests are not actually running

Re: PR process and etiquette

Great ideas Owen. I do apologize for the BIG lump of text… stupid formatting of lack thereof… --Udo From: Owen Nichols Date: Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 12:03 PM To: dev@geode.apache.org Subject: Re: PR process and etiquette +1 for using GitHub's draft status to indicate work-in-progress.

Re: PR process and etiquette

+1 for using GitHub's draft status to indicate work-in-progress. Many great suggestions here, however I generally prefer that we don't squash commits at any point except the final Squash and Merge to develop. I find it insightful to see how the work evolved. I also find that review comments

PR process and etiquette

Dear Apache Geode Devs, It is really great going through all the PRs that been submitted. As Josh Long is known to say: "I work for PRs". Whilst going through some of the PRs I do see that there are many PRs that have multiple commits against the PR. I know that the PR submission framework kicks

Re: [PROPOSAL] backport GEODE-8651 to 1.13, 9.10, 9.9

+1 On Oct 27, 2020 3:00 PM, Donal Evans wrote: +1 From: Anthony Baker Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 2:53 PM To: dev@geode.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] backport GEODE-8651 to 1.13, 9.10, 9.9 +1 from me > On Oct 27, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Xiaojian Zhou

Re: [PROPOSAL] backport GEODE-8651 to 1.13, 9.10, 9.9

+1 From: Anthony Baker Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 2:53 PM To: dev@geode.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] backport GEODE-8651 to 1.13, 9.10, 9.9 +1 from me > On Oct 27, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Xiaojian Zhou wrote: > > Hi, all: > > The fix is to resolve a hang

Re: [PROPOSAL] backport GEODE-8651 to 1.13, 9.10, 9.9

+1 from me > On Oct 27, 2020, at 2:21 PM, Xiaojian Zhou wrote: > > Hi, all: > > The fix is to resolve a hang when Connection called notifyHandshakeWaiter the > 2nd time and cleared the NioFilter’s unwrapped buffer by mistake. > > The 2nd call should consider if the 1st call has finished

Please review PR #5667

GEODE-8647: Support multiple instances of DistributedMap #5667 https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/5667 Thanks, Kirk

[PROPOSAL] backport GEODE-8651 to 1.13, 9.10, 9.9

Hi, all: The fix is to resolve a hang when Connection called notifyHandshakeWaiter the 2nd time and cleared the NioFilter’s unwrapped buffer by mistake. The 2nd call should consider if the 1st call has finished handshake. If yes, do nothing. The fix is fully tested and has no risk. This

Re: PRs to review in geode-native

Hi Blake, I am hoping opening a PR to support my initial test proposal is off the table, right? If so, give me a couple of days and I will think of alternatives. If nothing comes to my mind, then I'll reach you back. Thanks btw for merging PR #667 BR, Mario.

Re: PRs to review in geode-native

I've asked mreddington to re-review today. I think we're still hoping to have a test for this, though, right? On 10/27/20, 5:51 AM, "Mario Salazar de Torres" wrote: Hi everyone, Thanks everyone involved for merging PR

Re: PRs to review in geode-native

Hi everyone, Thanks everyone involved for merging PR #659. Thing is that it has been a while since #660 got any feedback. Is there any chance you could reserve some time to give me some feedback on