Re: 8.6.3 Release

ht) are >> > > > especially necessary because they work around a Jetty buffer-reuse >> bug >> > > > (see SOLR-14896) that causes sporadic request failures once >> triggered. >> > > > >>

Re: 8.6.3 Release

anks David for the quick > > > > work on SOLR-14768!) > > > > > > > > Additionally, should we also consider a Jetty upgrade for 8.6.3 in > > > > light of the issue mentioned above? I know it's atypical for bug-fix > > > > releas

Re: 8.6.3 Release

gt; > > to the dep. SOLR-14897 and SOLR-14898 help greatly here, but the > > > Jetty bug is likely still a problem for users making requests that > > > match a specific (albeit rare) profile. Anyone have thoughts? > > > > > > Best, > > > > > >

Re: 8.6.3 Release

> After checking, I think this fits the bill: > > https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/dev-tools/scripts/releaseWizard.yaml#L1435 > > > > - Houston > > > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:06 AM David Smiley wrote: > > > > > > When movin

Re: 8.6.3 Release

es from 8.7 to 8.6.3, must we (the mover of an individual > change) move the CHANGES.txt entry on all branches -- master, branch_8x, > branch_8_6? I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two. In > the past I have but it's annoying. Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other >

Re: 8.6.3 Release

atly here, but the > > > > > Jetty bug is likely still a problem for users making requests that > > > > > match a specific (albeit rare) profile. Anyone have thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > >

Re: 8.6.3 Release

atch a specific (albeit rare) profile. Anyone have thoughts? >> > > >> > > Best, >> > > >> > > Jason >> > > >> > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:28 AM Houston Putman >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > >

Re: 8.6.3 Release

gt; > > https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/dev-tools/scripts/releaseWizard.yaml#L1435 > > > > > > - Houston > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:06 AM David Smiley > wrote: > > > > > > > > > When moving changes f

Re: 8.6.3 Release

wrote: > > > > FWIW: I followed the docs to update the Dockerfiles + TAGS for 8.6.3, and > run tests; but since it's in a distinct github repo I don't think i can > push to it? > > so i creaed a GH issue w/patch... > > https://github.com/docker-solr/docker-solr/issue

Re: 8.6.3 Release

> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer >>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 10:20 AM Chris Hostetter >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> &

Re: 8.6.3 Release

0:20 AM Chris Hostetter > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > FWIW: I followed the docs to update the Dockerfiles + TAGS for 8.6.3, > > > > and > > > > run tests; but since it's in a distinct github repo I don't think i can

Re: 8.6.3 Release

don't think i can > >> push to it? > >> > >> so i creaed a GH issue w/patch... > >> > >> https://github.com/docker-solr/docker-solr/issues/349 > >> > >> > >> > >> : Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 11:33:15 -0400 > &g

Re: 8.6.3 Release

ne have thoughts? >> : > >> : > Best, >> : > >> : > Jason >> : > >> : > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:28 AM Houston Putman >> : > wrote: >> : > >> : > >> : > If I recall correctly, thats

Re: 8.6.3 Release

a GH issue w/patch... > > https://github.com/docker-solr/docker-solr/issues/349 > > > > : Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 11:33:15 -0400 > : From: Houston Putman > : Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org > : To: Solr/Lucene Dev > : Subject: Re: 8.6.3 Release > : > : That is correc

Re: 8.6.3 Release

-0400 : From: Houston Putman : Reply-To: dev@lucene.apache.org : To: Solr/Lucene Dev : Subject: Re: 8.6.3 Release : : That is correct. 8.x docker builds have not been affected in any way. : : On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 11:30 AM Cassandra Targett : wrote: : : > I wanted to ask now that the 8.6.3 v

Re: 8.6.3 Release

ver of an individual > change) move the CHANGES.txt entry on all branches -- master, branch_8x, > branch_8_6? I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two. In > the past I have but it's annoying. Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the > other branches in one go? If not, I think it'd make sense

Re: 8.6.3 Release

> > After checking, I think this fits the bill: > > > https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/dev-tools/scripts/releaseWizard.yaml#L1435 > > > > > > - Houston > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:06 AM David Smil

Re: 8.6.3 Release

S.txt entry on all branches -- master, branch_8x, > > branch_8_6? I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two. In > > the past I have but it's annoying. Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the > > other branches in one go? If not, I think it'd make sense for that

Re: 8.6.3 Release

; branch_8_6? I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two. In > the past I have but it's annoying. Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other > branches in one go? If not, I think it'd make sense for that to happen. > > ~ David Smiley > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer

Re: 8.6.3 Release

> > > > master, branch_8x, branch_8_6? I expect the release branch but am > > > > > unsure of the other two. In the past I have but it's annoying. Does > > > > > the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one

Re: 8.6.3 Release

gt; CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one go? If not, I think it'd make > >>> sense for that to happen. > >>> > >>> ~ David Smiley > >>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer > >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >

Re: 8.6.3 Release

e past I have but it's annoying. Does the RM sync > CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one go? If not, I think it'd make > sense for that to happen. > >>> > >>> ~ David Smiley > >>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer &g

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Developer >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:22 AM Atri Sharma wrote: >>>> >>>> I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to >>>> >>>> >>

Re: 8.6.3 Release

;> >> >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:22 AM Atri Sharma wrote: >>> >>> I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to >>> >>> >>> do the 8.6.3 release. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >

Re: 8.6.3 Release

eek to give Jason enough headroom to >> >> >> do the 8.6.3 release. >> >> >> >> >> >> Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason

Re: 8.6.3 Release

oom to > do the 8.6.3 release. > > Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release. > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski > wrote: > > > > OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving > > then, so Atri can

Re: 8.6.3 Release

I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to do the 8.6.3 release. Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release. On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski wrote: > > OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving >

Re: 8.6.3 Release

OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as possible. My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 by proposing a bug-fix release. But the reasons make sense given what others mentioned above.

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page. As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3! I recently fixed SOLR-14768 , multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced). If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over. It's the least I can offer in repentance

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Simultaneous releases are problematic for our backward-compatibility tests, but we do not need to wait between releases, we could start the release process right away when 8.6.3 is out. I don't think there's any potential for confusion. We've done this several times in the past, e.g. 7.1.0 was

Re: 8.6.3 Release

The release process is not conducive to simultaneous releases. We need to space them out. On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 12:01 AM Atri Sharma wrote: > I am not sure if two close releases are a good idea — would they not lead > to potential confusion amongst users? > > In any case, I will defer to the

Re: 8.6.3 Release

I am not sure if two close releases are a good idea — would they not lead to potential confusion amongst users? In any case, I will defer to the opinion of committers. On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 23:46, Jason Gerlowski wrote: > > do we want to delay that? > > > > It wasn't my intention to delay

Re: 8.6.3 Release

> do we want to delay that? It wasn't my intention to delay 8.7. The releases will end up being close together, but they're on different release lines so there's nothing wrong with that necessarily. Unless there's something inherent to the release process that makes it difficult to have two

Re: 8.6.3 Release

I was planning on a branch cut on 30th September for 8.7 — do we want to delay that? On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 19:37, Jason Gerlowski wrote: > Hi all, > > > > I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused > > problems for some of my usecases. I wanted to volunteer as RM for an

Re: 8.6.3 Release

+1 On Wed, 23 Sep, 2020, 8:23 pm Andrzej Białecki, wrote: > I’d like to fix & backport SOLR-14850 & SOLR-14835. > > > On 23 Sep 2020, at 16:06, Jason Gerlowski wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused > > problems for some of my usecases.

Re: 8.6.3 Release

I’d like to fix & backport SOLR-14850 & SOLR-14835. > On 23 Sep 2020, at 16:06, Jason Gerlowski wrote: > > Hi all, > > I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused > problems for some of my usecases. I wanted to volunteer as RM for an > 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out

8.6.3 Release

Hi all, I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused problems for some of my usecases. I wanted to volunteer as RM for an 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some of the bigger changes in 8.7 I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's