Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

[Dave Barnes]

Thanks for clarifying, Mark. Let's wait for all the approvals and test
results before back-porting to 1.13.


On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 2:16 PM Mark Hanson  wrote:

> Hi Dave,
>
> So this PR is actually awaiting some reviews before it will be put on
> develop.
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
> On 6/16/20, 2:07 PM, "Dave Barnes"  wrote:
>
> If I understand correctly that the refactored version has already been
> checked in and tested on `develop`, then we have enough approvals to
> add
> this to 1.13.
> Go ahead, Mark.
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 8:45 AM Joris Melchior 
> wrote:
>
> > Yes, +1 on this change.
> >
> > Joris
> > 
> > From: Mark Hanson 
> > Sent: June 15, 2020 16:30
> > To: dev@geode.apache.org 
> > Subject: Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?
> >
> > To be clear the code for 1.13 using the Restore Redundancy Command
> in GFSH
> > is fine as it stands. We are refactoring to add the REST API version.
> >
> > Are people still good with that?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mark
> >
> > On 6/15/20, 1:28 PM, "Kirk Lund"  wrote:
> >
> > +1 for getting the change into 1.13
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:25 PM Owen Nichols <
> onich...@vmware.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 for getting it right the first time
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer<
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwhatisworkspaceone.com%2Fboxerdata=02%7C01%7Chansonm%40vmware.com%7C774b45ee83db4e6a5a5a08d812394116%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637279384406586799sdata=vcdgVzwoT7OO7%2BJJC1s6U8VVO2lpg0rYFCLSMHR9Kq4%3Dreserved=0
> > >
> > >
> > > On June 15, 2020 at 1:23:59 PM PDT, Mark Hanson <
> hans...@vmware.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > So we are working on refactoring the Restore Redundancy gfsh
> command
> > code
> > > and we have made a change to a class that is getting
> serialized. We
> > are
> > > curious if this is something we could maybe get into 1.13 (
> the first
> > > release of this command? Or should we just make our
> > > serialization/deserialization work for 2 versions?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mark
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

[Mark Hanson]

Hi Dave, 

So this PR is actually awaiting some reviews before it will be put on develop.

Thanks,
Mark

On 6/16/20, 2:07 PM, "Dave Barnes"  wrote:

If I understand correctly that the refactored version has already been
checked in and tested on `develop`, then we have enough approvals to add
this to 1.13.
Go ahead, Mark.

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 8:45 AM Joris Melchior  wrote:

> Yes, +1 on this change.
>
> Joris
> 
> From: Mark Hanson 
> Sent: June 15, 2020 16:30
> To: dev@geode.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?
>
> To be clear the code for 1.13 using the Restore Redundancy Command in GFSH
> is fine as it stands. We are refactoring to add the REST API version.
>
> Are people still good with that?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
> On 6/15/20, 1:28 PM, "Kirk Lund"  wrote:
>
> +1 for getting the change into 1.13
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:25 PM Owen Nichols 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for getting it right the first time
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer<
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwhatisworkspaceone.com%2Fboxerdata=02%7C01%7Chansonm%40vmware.com%7C774b45ee83db4e6a5a5a08d812394116%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637279384406586799sdata=vcdgVzwoT7OO7%2BJJC1s6U8VVO2lpg0rYFCLSMHR9Kq4%3Dreserved=0
> >
> >
> > On June 15, 2020 at 1:23:59 PM PDT, Mark Hanson 
> > wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > So we are working on refactoring the Restore Redundancy gfsh command
> code
> > and we have made a change to a class that is getting serialized. We
> are
> > curious if this is something we could maybe get into 1.13 ( the 
first
> > release of this command? Or should we just make our
> > serialization/deserialization work for 2 versions?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mark
> >
>
>

Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

[Dave Barnes]

If I understand correctly that the refactored version has already been
checked in and tested on `develop`, then we have enough approvals to add
this to 1.13.
Go ahead, Mark.

On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 8:45 AM Joris Melchior  wrote:

> Yes, +1 on this change.
>
> Joris
> 
> From: Mark Hanson 
> Sent: June 15, 2020 16:30
> To: dev@geode.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?
>
> To be clear the code for 1.13 using the Restore Redundancy Command in GFSH
> is fine as it stands. We are refactoring to add the REST API version.
>
> Are people still good with that?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
> On 6/15/20, 1:28 PM, "Kirk Lund"  wrote:
>
> +1 for getting the change into 1.13
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:25 PM Owen Nichols 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for getting it right the first time
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer<
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwhatisworkspaceone.com%2Fboxerdata=02%7C01%7Cjmelchior%40vmware.com%7C9d6cf31bdd97492b191808d8116ae982%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637278498191299129sdata=7pw0D4Xl2AYwFj%2BLn7apALTVw%2B5nZaVDP6Vkz0Nl4HU%3Dreserved=0
> >
> >
> > On June 15, 2020 at 1:23:59 PM PDT, Mark Hanson 
> > wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > So we are working on refactoring the Restore Redundancy gfsh command
> code
> > and we have made a change to a class that is getting serialized. We
> are
> > curious if this is something we could maybe get into 1.13 ( the first
> > release of this command? Or should we just make our
> > serialization/deserialization work for 2 versions?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mark
> >
>
>

Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

[Joris Melchior]

Yes, +1 on this change.

Joris

From: Mark Hanson 
Sent: June 15, 2020 16:30
To: dev@geode.apache.org 
Subject: Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

To be clear the code for 1.13 using the Restore Redundancy Command in GFSH is 
fine as it stands. We are refactoring to add the REST API version.

Are people still good with that?

Thanks,
Mark

On 6/15/20, 1:28 PM, "Kirk Lund"  wrote:

+1 for getting the change into 1.13

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:25 PM Owen Nichols  wrote:

> +1 for getting it right the first time
>
>
> ---
> Sent from Workspace ONE 
Boxer<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwhatisworkspaceone.com%2Fboxerdata=02%7C01%7Cjmelchior%40vmware.com%7C9d6cf31bdd97492b191808d8116ae982%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637278498191299129sdata=7pw0D4Xl2AYwFj%2BLn7apALTVw%2B5nZaVDP6Vkz0Nl4HU%3Dreserved=0>
>
> On June 15, 2020 at 1:23:59 PM PDT, Mark Hanson 
> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> So we are working on refactoring the Restore Redundancy gfsh command code
> and we have made a change to a class that is getting serialized. We are
> curious if this is something we could maybe get into 1.13 ( the first
> release of this command? Or should we just make our
> serialization/deserialization work for 2 versions?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>

Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

[Donal Evans]

+1 for getting the feature fully implemented in one release rather than 
spreading it out over 2.

From: Mark Hanson 
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 1:23 PM
To: dev@geode.apache.org 
Subject: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

Hi All,

So we are working on refactoring the Restore Redundancy gfsh command code and 
we have made a change to a class that is getting serialized. We are curious if 
this is something we could maybe get into 1.13 ( the first release of this 
command? Or should we just make our serialization/deserialization work for 2 
versions?

Thanks,
Mark

Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

[Jinmei Liao]

+1 for making it simpler for upgrade.

From: Owen Nichols 
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2020 1:41 PM
To: dev@geode.apache.org 
Subject: Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

There is precedent[1] for bringing a refactoring to a support branch prior to 
initial release of that feature.  The window is still open, and backporting 
will keep that serialization code that much simpler for the future.  You have 
two +1's already, you just need one more __

[1] 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail-archives.apache.org%2Fmod_mbox%2Fgeode-dev%2F202002.mbox%2F%253cdd059468-0ac6-7ade-b783-2e538d90a055%40apache.com%253edata=02%7C01%7Cjiliao%40vmware.com%7Cee776e6ba2d54e06260a08d8116caf3b%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637278505778224125sdata=7yMFnw8HxBz4hMyoXj9%2Bzl8l%2BOBEB2SgiqZrYa7Urrg%3Dreserved=0

On 6/15/20, 1:30 PM, "Mark Hanson"  wrote:

To be clear the code for 1.13 using the Restore Redundancy Command in GFSH 
is fine as it stands. We are refactoring to add the REST API version.

Are people still good with that?

Thanks,
Mark

On 6/15/20, 1:28 PM, "Kirk Lund"  wrote:

+1 for getting the change into 1.13

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:25 PM Owen Nichols  
wrote:

> +1 for getting it right the first time
>
>
> ---
> Sent from Workspace ONE 
Boxer<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwhatisworkspaceone.com%2Fboxerdata=02%7C01%7Cjiliao%40vmware.com%7Cee776e6ba2d54e06260a08d8116caf3b%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C637278505778224125sdata=nd54tfXvwExG%2F6G1ZgmZt50ip4KVLRZBRUbY6BN0B2s%3Dreserved=0>
>
> On June 15, 2020 at 1:23:59 PM PDT, Mark Hanson 
> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> So we are working on refactoring the Restore Redundancy gfsh command 
code
> and we have made a change to a class that is getting serialized. We 
are
> curious if this is something we could maybe get into 1.13 ( the first
> release of this command? Or should we just make our
> serialization/deserialization work for 2 versions?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>

Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

[Owen Nichols]

There is precedent[1] for bringing a refactoring to a support branch prior to 
initial release of that feature.  The window is still open, and backporting 
will keep that serialization code that much simpler for the future.  You have 
two +1's already, you just need one more __

[1] 
https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geode-dev/202002.mbox/%3cdd059468-0ac6-7ade-b783-2e538d90a...@apache.com%3e

On 6/15/20, 1:30 PM, "Mark Hanson"  wrote:

To be clear the code for 1.13 using the Restore Redundancy Command in GFSH 
is fine as it stands. We are refactoring to add the REST API version.

Are people still good with that?

Thanks,
Mark

On 6/15/20, 1:28 PM, "Kirk Lund"  wrote:

+1 for getting the change into 1.13

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:25 PM Owen Nichols  
wrote:

> +1 for getting it right the first time
>
>
> ---
> Sent from Workspace ONE 
Boxer
>
> On June 15, 2020 at 1:23:59 PM PDT, Mark Hanson 
> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> So we are working on refactoring the Restore Redundancy gfsh command 
code
> and we have made a change to a class that is getting serialized. We 
are
> curious if this is something we could maybe get into 1.13 ( the first
> release of this command? Or should we just make our
> serialization/deserialization work for 2 versions?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>

Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

[Mark Hanson]

To be clear the code for 1.13 using the Restore Redundancy Command in GFSH is 
fine as it stands. We are refactoring to add the REST API version.

Are people still good with that?

Thanks,
Mark

On 6/15/20, 1:28 PM, "Kirk Lund"  wrote:

+1 for getting the change into 1.13

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:25 PM Owen Nichols  wrote:

> +1 for getting it right the first time
>
>
> ---
> Sent from Workspace ONE 
Boxer
>
> On June 15, 2020 at 1:23:59 PM PDT, Mark Hanson 
> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> So we are working on refactoring the Restore Redundancy gfsh command code
> and we have made a change to a class that is getting serialized. We are
> curious if this is something we could maybe get into 1.13 ( the first
> release of this command? Or should we just make our
> serialization/deserialization work for 2 versions?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>

Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

[Kirk Lund]

+1 for getting the change into 1.13

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 1:25 PM Owen Nichols  wrote:

> +1 for getting it right the first time
>
>
> ---
> Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer
>
> On June 15, 2020 at 1:23:59 PM PDT, Mark Hanson 
> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> So we are working on refactoring the Restore Redundancy gfsh command code
> and we have made a change to a class that is getting serialized. We are
> curious if this is something we could maybe get into 1.13 ( the first
> release of this command? Or should we just make our
> serialization/deserialization work for 2 versions?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>

Re: Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

[Owen Nichols]

+1 for getting it right the first time


---
Sent from Workspace ONE Boxer

On June 15, 2020 at 1:23:59 PM PDT, Mark Hanson  wrote:
Hi All,

So we are working on refactoring the Restore Redundancy gfsh command code and 
we have made a change to a class that is getting serialized. We are curious if 
this is something we could maybe get into 1.13 ( the first release of this 
command? Or should we just make our serialization/deserialization work for 2 
versions?

Thanks,
Mark

Refactor to Restore Redundancy Command for 1.13?

[Mark Hanson]

Hi All,

So we are working on refactoring the Restore Redundancy gfsh command code and 
we have made a change to a class that is getting serialized. We are curious if 
this is something we could maybe get into 1.13 ( the first release of this 
command? Or should we just make our serialization/deserialization work for 2 
versions?

Thanks,
Mark