Re: Wiki access

Done. You should have access now. Thanks! -Dan On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 4:05 AM Mario Kevo wrote: > Hi All, > > Can I have access to edit the Geode Wiki? > My username is "mario.kevo". > > Thanks, > Mario >

Re: region name is incorrect while trying to get using region.get

Did you see the responses on the user list? You may need to subscribe to the list to actually get email responses from people who just reply to the list. Here are the replies to that thread if you didn't get them through email: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/04a4625ecd4c4da941ec926fa58cf466f

Re: Permission to assign tickets in Jira

Done! -Dan On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 3:38 PM Patrick Johnson wrote: > Hi all, > > Could someone grant me permission to assign tickets to myself in the Geode > Jira? > > My Jira username is pjohnson. > > -- > Thanks, > Patrick Johnson >

Re: [DISCUSS] is overriding a PR check ever justified?

On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 11:56 AM Owen Nichols wrote: > Tallying the votes from this thread, it looks like the majority vote is to > NEVER allow override even in extreme circumstance. > I think a better way of summarizing this thread so far is that there isn't really a consensus on this point, op

Re: [VOTE] Fix bad-merge of GEODE-7488

+1 Go for it. -Dan On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:07 PM Owen Nichols wrote: > It would set a bad precedent to circumvent without due process a decision > that was agreed by the Geode community < > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/1ba19d9aeb206148c922afdd182ba322d6f128bbb83983f2f72a108e@%3Cdev.g

Re: [DISCUSS] - Move gfsh into its own submodule

+1 Awesome!!! -Dan On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 9:33 AM Owen Nichols wrote: > +1 > > It makes total sense that gfsh should depend on core, and core should be > completely unaware of it. The dependency untangling that results will also > help pave the way for other interfaces, such as a gfsh-free m

Re: DistributionArchUnitTest OutOfMemoryError

nd time. > > -michael > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 4:53 PM Dan Smith wrote: > > > We recently added this test. It passes for me, but I will look into it. > It > > is scanning classes, so that may be your oome. > > > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2019, 4:00 PM Kirk Lund wr

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.11.0.RC2

-1 based on Blakes feedback. If we need to change the native client tag and source zip, we need to create RC3. -Dan On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 11:31 AM Blake Bender wrote: > We could also just tag the current NC develop branch. I've run all my > integration tests from NC develop branch against 1.

Re: Access to edit the Geode Wiki

Hi Mark, You should have access now. Thanks, -Dan On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 5:27 PM Mark Hanson wrote: > Hi All, > > Can I have access to edit the Geode Wiki to add release notes? My > confluence ID is "mhanson". > > Thanks, > Mark

Re: DistributionArchUnitTest OutOfMemoryError

We recently added this test. It passes for me, but I will look into it. It is scanning classes, so that may be your oome. On Wed, Nov 20, 2019, 4:00 PM Kirk Lund wrote: > Any ideas why DistributionArchUnitTest would run OutOfMemoryError when > doing a "./gradlew build"? > > I think we should mov

Re: Proposal of new config property "ssl-server-name-extension"

Can you clarify which connections will use this ssl-server-name-extension as part of the Client Hello? client to locator, client to server, server to server, WAN site to WAN site, ... all of the above? I'm fine with adding the new property. At some point, I think we need to think about making it

Re: [DISCUSS] Move TcpServer and friends to new geode-tcp-server module

+1 -Dan On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 1:48 PM Bill Burcham wrote: > Dear Geode, > > In support of the Membership modularization efforts > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Move+membership+code+to+a+separate+gradle+sub-project > , > we would like to move the types in the > org.apache

Re: Proposal to modify Servlet spec support for the HTTP Session Management Module for AppServers

+1 to bumping to servlet 3.0. -Dan On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 12:16 PM Charles Smith wrote: > Seems to me as long as newer Servlet specs do not deprecate > functionality/api that the session module requires AND that the session > module is not missing any important functionality provided by newer

Re: Odg: gateway sender queue

eanQueues)" > > > > This option will indicate, when gateway sender is started, should we > > discard/clean existing queue, or should we use existing queue. > > By default it will be to discard/clean existing queue. > > > > Best Regards, > > Mario

Re: [DISCUSS] - Upgrading from Spring 4 to Spring 5

+1 On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 12:49 PM Jens Deppe wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 1:39 PM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > > > Sorry, > > > > To clarify... When we change the Spring version we would be looking at > > looking to use the latest version and it's associated BOM. > > > > That might be inc

Re: Lucene upgrade

> > > > > I'd prefer option 1 or some other robust solution, because I think > > > option 2 > > > > has many possible issues. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Jason > > > > > > > > > > > >&

Re: gateway sender queue

Some replies, inline: * During testing we have observed, different behavior in parallel and > serial gateway senders. In case we manually stop, than start gateway > senders, for parallel gateway senders, queue is purged, but for serial > gateway senders this is not the case. Is this normal beh

Re: Lucene upgrade

I think the issue probably has to do with doing a rolling upgrade from an old version of geode (with an old version of lucene) to the new version of geode. Geode's lucene integration works by writing the lucene index to a colocated region. So lucene index data that was generated on one server can

Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: ClassNotFoundException: LogService

Kirk and I tracked this down. He had a GEODE_HOME environment variable which the locator was picking up and finding an old war file from. -Dan On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 4:16 PM Dan Smith wrote: > Hi Kirk, > > Did you do a ./gradlew clean? It looks like you might be picking up an old >

Re: ClassNotFoundException: LogService

Your test passes for me, btw. -Dan On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 4:14 PM Dan Smith wrote: > Hi Kirk, > > Did you do a ./gradlew clean? It looks like you might be picking up an old > version of one of the geode war files that is referring to the old location > of the LogService class.

***UNCHECKED*** Re: ClassNotFoundException: LogService

gt; [locator] at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(URLClassLoader.java:382) > > > > The above is interesting because it's the old package, not the current > > one. The current package is > > *org.apache.geode.logging.internal.log4j.api.LogService*. > > > > There are t

Re: Jira permission to assign myself

Hi Joris, You now also have access. Thanks! -Dan On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 8:12 AM Joris Melchior wrote: > Hi Dan, > > Can you provide me with the ability to assign tickets to myself as well? > > Username: joris.melchior > > Thanks, Joris. > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2019

Re: [DISCUSS] Tweak to branch protection rules

:44 AM Nabarun Nag > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 6:21 PM Darrel Schneider < > > > > > dschnei...@pivotal.io> > > > >

Re: Jira permission to assign myself

19 at 11:13 AM Szu-Yu Lo wrote: > Hi Dan, > > My username is sylo. > > Thanks > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 2:12 PM Dan Smith wrote: > > > Hi Szu-Yu Lo, > > > > What is your JIRA username? If you don't already have an account, you can > > create o

Re: Jira permission to assign myself

Hi Szu-Yu Lo, What is your JIRA username? If you don't already have an account, you can create one. -Dan On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 10:09 AM Szu-Yu Lo wrote: > Hi, > > I am new to geode and would love to contributed to geode. I am not able to > assigned myself. It would be greatly appreciated, i

Re: [DISCUSS] is overriding a PR check ever justified?

+1 for allowing overrides. I think we should avoid backing ourselves into a corner where we can't get anything into develop without talking to apache infra. Some infrastructure things we can't even fix without pushing a change develop! How do you override a check, anyway? -Dan On Wed, Oct 30, 20

[DISCUSS] Tweak to branch protection rules

Hi all, It seems we've configured our branch protection rules such that pushing a change to a PR that has been approved invalidates the previous approval. I think we should turn this off - it looks like it's an optional feature. We should trust people to rerequest reviews if needed. Right now thi

Re: What tomcat8 is Geode using?

To be clear, we are not actually shipping tomcat with geode. But we do compile and test our session replication modules against multiple versions of tomcat. We test against all the versions listed in that DependencyContraints.groovy file: deps.put("tomcat6.version", "6.0.37") deps.put("tom

Re: Request for bulk change permission

I think you should have permissions now. -Dan On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 10:00 AM Jens Deppe wrote: > I don't seem to have this - please could someone grant it. > > Thanks > --Jens >

Re: Lingering Geode 1.10.0 release issues

Bruce has picked up GEODE-7250. -Dan On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 9:27 AM Dick Cavender wrote: > If you try and brew update to Geode 1.10.0 you won't get it until our > 1.10.0 homebrew PR > gets > through their checks and their Jenkins servers s

Re: [DISCUSS] Logging module separation

Sorry Anil. Maybe this will work - https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/cRLABw -Dan

Re: [DISCUSS] Logging module separation

If you are wondering how this relates to the geode-log4j work that Kirk did, the following diagram might help. Basically, he made a geode-log4j module that makes log4j-core optional. This geode-logging module allows the use of some of our log4j wrapper classes from modules other than geode-core. [

Re: [PROPOSAL] adding java-jq to GEODE dependency for testing

+1 - sounds good. BTW - We've previously found libraries that use JNA tend to be more flaky/platform dependent than pure java libaries - for example we ripped out a snappy native wrapper in favor of a pure java implementation. -Dan On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 8:39 AM Anthony Baker wrote: > Sounds

Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-7241 - make Jar not War?

I could see value in publishing the war files, if geode will actually pick up the war file from the classpath and deploy it when these features are enabled. Udo - it looks like you actually made a change with GEODE-5660 to enable that? +1 to making them .GWAR instead :) -Dan On Wed, Sep 25, 2019

Re: War's vs JArs

Huh. Looks like we're missing a 'from components.web' in publish.gradle if we want to publish the war files. I'm not sure why this has changed. I'm not sure how we want to actually ship these projects - they are in the .tgz of geode. They are not really standalone war files, from what I remember -

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.10.0.RC2

+1 Ran geode-release-check (checks signatures, source build, simple gfsh test) -Dan On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 3:20 PM Jacob Barrett wrote: > +1 > > Still think it is ok to ship but found another annoying issue. When > running Geode Native C++ integration tests (new framework) an indented > disab

Re: Reviewers for PR #3888

Reviewed and merged. Thanks for all your hard work on this one! -Dan On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 6:18 AM Alberto Gomez wrote: > Hi, > > Could I please get some extra reviewers for > https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/3888? > > This PR is about GEODE-7049: Add timeout parameter to Java client > Ex

Re: [DISCUSS] Improvements on client function execution API

up on the implementation. > > -Alberto G. > > On 12/9/19 8:15, Jacob Barrett wrote: > > +1 > > > > I echo Dan’s comments as well. > > > > Thanks for tackling this. > > > > -jake > > > > > >> On Sep 11, 2019, at 2:36 PM, Dan Smith wr

Re: Propose including GEODE-7178 in 1.10

+1 for getting this in 1.10. I am curious though - is the native client behaving like an older versions of the java client, or is this totally unique behavior for the native client? Is there some integration test that we are missing here? -Dan On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 11:52 AM Michael Oleske wro

Re: [DISCUSS] Improvements on client function execution API

in the Java client. > > - Do not implement the blocking execute(timeout) method on the server > and leave the current execute() implementation on the server as it is > (non-blocking) > > Does this make sense? > > -Alberto > > On 29/8/19 12:56, Alberto Gómez wrote: >

Re: Question about excluding serialized classes

unctionService class does not specify that > >> getFunction must return the same type function as the one passed to > >> registerFunction, but I could see how users might be relying on that > >> behavior since there is no other way to get a specific function type

Re: Question about excluding serialized classes

e passed to > registerFunction, but I could see how users might be relying on that > behavior since there is no other way to get a specific function type out of > the FunctionService without doing a cast. > > - Aaron > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 10:52 AM Dan Smith wrote: >

Re: [Proposal] Make gfsh "stop server" command synchronous

ghts? > > Thanks, > Mark > > > On Sep 11, 2019, at 10:23 AM, Dan Smith wrote: > > > > It does seem like we should make stop synchronous, or at least make start > > wait for the old process to die as Bruce suggested. Otherwise it is > > difficult for someone

Re: Question about excluding serialized classes

Functions are serialized when you call Execution.execute(Function) instead of Execution.execute(String). Invoking execute on a function object serializes the function and executes it on the remote side. Functions executed this way don't have be registered. Users can also get registered function ob

Re: [Proposal] Make gfsh "stop server" command synchronous

It does seem like we should make stop synchronous, or at least make start wait for the old process to die as Bruce suggested. Otherwise it is difficult for someone to script the restart of a server. Looking at the code, it does look like gfsh stop is asynchronous. There are multiple ways to stop a

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC - Move membership code to a separate gradle sub-project

> module and believe some attention is to be given to this, once a > decision to convert the serialization to a stand alone module. > > --Udo > > On 8/30/19 3:50 PM, Dan Smith wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > We added the following RFC to the wiki about moving Geode&#x

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.10.0.RC1

>>>>> > >> > org.gradle.api.internal.tasks.execution.EventFiringTaskExecuter.execute(EventFiringTaskExecuter.java:49) > >>>>>> at > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >> > org.gradle.execution.plan.LocalTaskNodeExecutor.e

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.10.0.RC1

> > > test > > > > to fail. > > > > > > > > I am not sure if this is harmless or has some adverse consequences. I > > > would > > > > like to know why it's designed this way. > > > > > > > > Regards

Re: Wiki write access needed

Ok, you should have access now. -Dan On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 5:01 PM Ernest Burghardt wrote: > echobravo > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 4:43 PM Dan Smith wrote: > > > What's your username on the wiki? > > > > -Dan > > > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 4:36

Re: Wiki write access needed

What's your username on the wiki? -Dan On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 4:36 PM Ernest Burghardt wrote: > Hello, > > May I please have write access to the wiki? > > Thank you, > EB >

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.10.0.RC1

/repos/dist/dev/geode/1.10.0.RC1/ > Please continue to review RC1 as a viable 1.10 RC. The voting deadline > remains 3PM PST Thursday Sept 5th. > > -Dick > > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:09 PM Dan Smith wrote: > > > Everything but the missing native source looks good

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1.RC3

+1 Ran geode-release-check - https://github.com/upthewaterspout/geode-release-check I have no opinion on the bug Jens found - since was a bug in 1.9.0, I'm ok shipping 1.9.1 without it. -Dan On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 10:16 AM Robert Houghton wrote: > Hi Jens, > > Does this issue appear in 1.10.0

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.10.0.RC1

Everything but the missing native source looks good. If we can fix that, I'll +1 this RC. -Dan On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 2:26 PM Dan Smith wrote: > -1 It looks like this RC is also missing the native source, just like > 1.9.1.RC3. The tar file is there, but it is empty. > > -Da

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.10.0.RC1

-1 It looks like this RC is also missing the native source, just like 1.9.1.RC3. The tar file is there, but it is empty. -Dan On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 2:06 PM Dick Cavender wrote: > Hello Geode dev community, > > This is a release candidate for Apache Geode, version 1.10.0.RC1. > Thanks to all t

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1.RC3

It looks like the native source is missing from this RC? There is a tar file, but it is emply if you try to unzip it. -Dan On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 11:11 AM Owen Nichols wrote: > Hello Geode dev community, > > This is a release candidate for Apache Geode, version 1.9.1.RC3. > Thanks to all the c

[DISCUSS] RFC - Move membership code to a separate gradle sub-project

Hi all, We added the following RFC to the wiki about moving Geode's membership system to a separate gradle sub-project. Please review and comment by 9/6/2019. https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/WRB4Bw Thanks! -Dan

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1 RC1 (new vote)

I'm going to vote -1 until we get the Version.java issue figured out. It is sounding like we will need to revert the changes and create a new RC unless we come to an agreement that bumping the version for 1.9.1 is the right way to go. -Dan On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:47 AM Jens Deppe wrote: > +1

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1 RC1

us with only 3 (102, 103 and 104) if we *ever* need to issue > more 1.9 patches. I recommend removing that Version and leaving the > serialization version at 1.9.0 for this release. > > > > On 8/28/19 2:51 PM, Dan Smith wrote: > >> I missed this vote email as well - if we

Re: [DISCUSS] Improvements on client function execution API

Sorry for the slow response, I've been trying to decide what I think is the right approach here. For (1) - conceptually, I don't have a problem with having both blocking and non blocking methods on Execution. So adding blocking versions of execute() with a timeout seems ok. But I do think if we ad

Re: [VOTE] Apache Geode 1.9.1 RC1

I missed this vote email as well - if we reopen the vote I'll cast one. I don't really have much context on why we want a 1.9.1 but I'm happy to double check the bits. One comment on this RC - I noticed that we bumped the ordinal in Version.java - is that what we actually want to do? That implies

Re: [DISCUSS] Pulling the current proposed 1.10 release until we can agree on develop being stable

+1 to creating RC1 with the current release/1.10 branch this week. I don't see a fundamental problem with cherry-picking some targeted and tested fixes to release/1.10, based on our assessment of the risk to customers vs. the risk of destabilizing the branch. I think release/1.10 is in a good stat

Propose including GEODE-7085 in 1.10

Hi, I'd like to propose including the fixes for GEODE-7085 into 1.10 (SHA's below). This is not a new issue, but it does result not being able to recover from disk without this fix if a cluster has more than 2 billion updates to a single bucket from a single member. SHAs: f587101 , f17931bf Th

Fwd: [DISCUSS] Improvements on client function execution API

For the two new execute() methods you are proposing, are you also suggesting that they be implemented on the server? I took a look at the C++ API. The C++ API also has a ResultCollector.getResult(timeout) method. Does that timeout do anything, given that execute(timeout) already waited for the giv

Re: Rat check reporting error in travis-ci for geode-native

Hi Helena, I think the problem is that rat is currently broken on geode-native develop. -Dan On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 2:55 PM Helena Bales wrote: > Hi Alberto, > > If you have added a file as part of your PR, please add the header as a > commit to your working branch and add that as part of the

Re: [DISCUSS] Controlling event dispatch to AsyncEventListener (review by Aug 22)

Hi Anil, While I like the idea of matching the API of GatewaySender, I'm not sure I see how this solves the problem. Is it required of the user to call pause on the AsyncEventQueue as soon as it is created? How would someone do that when creating AEQs with xml or cluster configuration? Maybe it wo

Re: Propose fix for 1.10 release: Prevent NPE in getLocalSize()

@kirk - go ahead and push it. -Dan On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 3:13 PM Kirk Lund wrote: > I have the cherry-pick ready to push or file a PR. Let me know what you > prefer... > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 3:01 PM Dan Smith wrote: > > > Normally cherry-picking to the release

Re: Propose fix for 1.10 release: Prevent NPE in getLocalSize()

Normally cherry-picking to the release branch is the release managers job (Dick in this case) [1]. He asked me to help out while he was on vacation, so I will go ahead and cherry-pick it over. I kinda like the process Jake proposed though - creating a PR against the release branch. My only concern

Re: Proposal to Include GEODE-7079 in 1.10.0

+1 to merging Juan's fix for GEODE-7079. I've seen systems taken down by rapidly filling up the logs in the past, this does seem to be a critical fix from the perspective of system stability. Also, this is the change, which doesn't seem particularly risky to me. - ConflationKey key = new

Re: Wiki edit permissions

Done! You should have access now. Thanks, -Dan On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 10:02 AM Helena Bales wrote: > Hello, > I am trying to update a wiki doc and need permissions for Confluence. My > LDAP username is heybales. > Thank you! > ~Helena >

Re: Unit tests are hanging?

> With all that, I propose we permanently bump the timeouts on UnitTestX jobs > across the board (main pipeline, PR pipeline, etc) from 10 to 20 minutes to > be more tolerant of these types of degradations. > +1 -Dan

Another change for 1.10.0 release

Hi all, I'd like to get the fix for GEODE-7055 (Don't send failure replies from a P2P reader thread) into the 1.10.0 release branch. This bug was causing a hang on startup for users of the session replication module that didn't put the session jars on the classpath of the locator. The hang doesn'

Re: [DISCUSS] Time to cut Geode 1.10.0?

+1 for cutting a 1.10.0 release branch. On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 3:55 PM Nabarun Nag wrote: > Hi, > I believe the original authors of the feature has done their due diligence > and followed all steps, we can get this feature in under the Experimental > flag and let the community improve on it,

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC 0: Lightweight RFC Process

not yet rejected. > > I think it is ok to have an "Icebox" of proposals that lists areas of > improvement we want to target, but as of yet, no concrete proposal has > yet been submitted. Modularity comes to mind. It is not that we don't > want to do it, it is just tha

Re: some pages in the wiki may be not on the right place

+1 -Dan On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 9:44 AM Gang Yan wrote: > seems no disagree response( and no agree response), I am planning to do > this. > > Thanks > > Gang Yan（闫钢） > > > > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 12:06 PM Gang Yan wrote: > > > Hi Geode Dev > > > > updated table, to add 4 sub pages: > > > > o

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC 0: Lightweight RFC Process

t+Proposals+and+Specifications > > > . > > Thank you all for you great feedback throughout this process! > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 10:07 AM Dan Smith wrote: > > > > > > > Will moving the page around on the wiki result in dead links to the > draft >

Re: [Proposal] Refactor the Cache and Region perf stats structure.

Seems reasonable. I'm guessing that CachePerfImpl contains many RegionStats. Does PartitionRegionStatsImpl just contain a single RegionStats? On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 4:49 PM Mark Hanson wrote: > Hi All, > > As many of you may know our structure for our perf stats is not great. I > would like to

Re: Proposal: For PR reviews and change requests can we have a 7 day turn around on re-reviews?

+1 What do you think about assigning someone to each PR to make sure it gets through the process? We don't currently seem to be using github's "assignee" field. Committers can make themselves the assignee, but for contributors we could assign a committer who will make sure the PR gets reviewed and

Re: [PROPOSAL]: Improve OQL Method Invocation Security

With Juan's proposal, the user still has the option to use java's security manager. They can install a MethodAuthorizor that allows all methods and use a java SecurityManager to restrict method access to the methods they want. Regarding the question of "How far should we go to prevent users from s

Re: Access to update JIRA

Done! You should have access now. Thanks, -Dan On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 6:24 PM Kamilla Aslami wrote: > Hi Helena, > > My username is kaslami. > > Thanks! > Kamilla > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 6:21 PM Helena Bales wrote: > > > Hi Kamilla, > > > > What is your username for Jira? We'll need that

Re: [DISCUSS] Add a test dependency to geode-core - ArchUnit

gt;> (and/or maybe some other pieces) into separate gradle modules - > > proposal > > >>>>> forthcoming! However, as a first step we need to untangle those > > pieces of > > >>>>> code from the rest of geode-core. Rather than c

Re: [PROPOSAL]: Improve OQL Method Invocation Security

al? If you've already looked and didn't > really > > find anything relevant you could also mention that in the proposal. > > > > - Aaron > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:31 PM Jason Huynh wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > &g

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC 0: Lightweight RFC Process

> > Will moving the page around on the wiki result in dead links to the draft > version? > No. If you use the share button in the wiki, you get a permanent link to the page. Even if you just copy the URL from the address bar it doesn't include the folder the page is in. -Dan

Re: [PROPOSAL]: Improve OQL Method Invocation Security

+1 This proposal looks good to me! On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:15 PM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > +1, Count me in > > On 6/24/19 13:06, Juan José Ramos wrote: > > Hey Jake, > > > > Sure, I guess we could do a live session if there's enough interest after > > people have reviewed the proposal. > > Best

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC 0: Lightweight RFC Process

s part > of the proposal would be under development, correct? > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 3:30 PM Dan Smith wrote: > > > +1 > > > > Looks good to me! > > > > A couple of minor thoughts - it might be nice to have separate > > subdirectories on the

Re: [DISCUSS] RFC 0: Lightweight RFC Process

+1 Looks good to me! A couple of minor thoughts - it might be nice to have separate subdirectories on the wiki for the different proposal states, to easily see what state the proposals are in. One thing that isn't visible in these states - is the proposal actively under development? It might be

Re: [DISCUSS] Add a test dependency to geode-core - ArchUnit

hat. -Dan On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jacob Barrett wrote: > Are you adding this dependency to just the membership module? I am cool > with that. > > > On Jun 20, 2019, at 2:39 PM, Dan Smith wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > Bill, Ernie, and

Re: [PROPOSAL]: Improve OQL Method Invocation Security

+1 This looks really good! I put a couple of comments inline, and I have a few more general questions here: 1. Is the RegionQueryInvocationAuthorizer different than our existing shiro permissions? I thought users can already grant permissions for specific regions. What does this add in addition t

[DISCUSS] Add a test dependency to geode-core - ArchUnit

Hi all, Bill, Ernie, and I would like to add a new (apache licensed) test dependency to geode-core - https://github.com/TNG/ArchUnit. This is a tool that lets you write tests that make assertions about the interdependencies of your code - for example enforcing that package A does not depend on pac

Re: Confluence access

Done! You should have access now. Thanks, -Dan On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 4:03 PM Murtuza Boxwala wrote: > Can I get access to the confluence wiki, please? > > Email: mboxw...@pivotal.io > Username: mboxwala

Re: Disk dir size units in javadoc comments

I think the comment is correct, but what that test is doing is weird. I see it's setting this property, which leads be to believe that there is some code that changes the units based on this property. DirectoryHolder.SET_DIRECTORY_SIZE_IN_BYTES_FOR_TESTING_PURPOSES = true; Maybe a better change w

Re: [PROPOSAL] Instrumenting Geode Code

+1 I like it! I like that we are not having to maintain duplicate meter and stat code. Also, I think keeping hiding metrics and stats inside an instrumentation class with methods like regionAdded makes it much easier to unit test classes that record metrics. -Dan On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 5:13 PM Aa

Re: Permissions to apache-geode jira dashboard

You should have access now. Thanks, -Dan On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 10:31 AM Murtuza Boxwala wrote: > Can I please have permissions to edit the Apache-Geode JIRA dashboard. My > username is mboxwala. I would like to be able to add new tickets, edit > ticket, assign tickets to myself… > > Thanks,

Re: [DISCUSS] changing geode 32-bit counter stats to 64-bit

+1 - this sounds like a good change to me. -Dan On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 1:47 PM Jacob Barrett wrote: > I like this! > > I’d go ahead and change all the usage of the int methods to the long > methods. I’d deprecate the int methods to make it very clear. > > If some consumer is using the int metho

Re: [DISCUSS] require reviews before merging a PR

> > Would it be possible to allow people who do not have committer status to > request reviewers on a pull request. I'm not sure it's possible to do this with the "reviewers" field - if someone can figure out how to do this with the github IU, we can at least try filing an ticket with apache infr

Re: [DISCUSS] Criteria for PMC, committers

One concern I have about not bundling committer and PMC membership is that there is not much incentive to nominate someone to become a PMC member. When someone is an active contributor but not a committer it's visible in the fact that they have to ask others to merge their PRs, which also provides

Re: [PROPOSAL] Add hostname-for-clients to ConfigurationProperties

A user can configure the hostname-for-clients for locators and gateway receivers - they are part of the respective gfsh commands. Are you suggesting deprecating those settings as well, or just having a global property that is the default value if it is not overridden for a specific locator, cache-s

Re: Static Analysis Tools such as SonarQube or others?

We're currently running PMD as part of the gradle build. PMD is just running a couple of rules specifically to look for mutable statics. We've also enabled integration with lgtm to get a report - https://lgtm.com/projects/g/apache/geode/. I think added m

Re: what is the best way to update a geode pull request

+1 to pushing PR changes as separate commits. Also +1 to creating PRs with multiple commits where it makes sense. -Dan On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 1:28 PM Owen Nichols wrote: > Personally, I do not force-push to my PRs once any review comments have > been accumulated, for the reasons you mention. >

Re: [DISCUSS] require reviews before merging a PR

As others pointed out - I think it's really important to remember that people and community are much more important than process. That is a key part of "The Apache Way" - it's not a set very specific rules, but more of a philosophy of building an open community. I think this page has a good take on

Re: Permission for wiki

Added - you should have access now! Thanks, -Dan On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 3:28 PM Jack Weissburg wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to have permission to edit the wiki: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Guidelines+for+Cluster+Management+service > > Thank you, > > Jack Weissburg

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >