Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

2016-08-30 Thread Rakesh Radhakrishnan
IIUC, the summary of this discussion is that no one (yet) sees the issues flagged as blockers for the 3.4.9 release. No one yet has decided to vote -1. (If anybody has concerns, I'm happy to create another release candidate.) This [VOTE] is still open, so kindly do review the RC and vote.

Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

2016-08-29 Thread Rakesh Radhakrishnan
OK, it would be good to update the existing list in 'HowToRelease' page so that it will be clear to everyone. Hi All, I'd request everyone to cast your vote on 3.4.9-RC2 and that would really helpful to take the thread ahead. Thank you! Rakesh On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Flavio Junqueira

Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

2016-08-29 Thread Flavio Junqueira
Issues that are "not a problem" are essentially no-ops. Including them is not wrong per se, but I'd say it is unnecessary and adds more lines to the release notes. Unless the goal of the release notes is to list the issues we investigated as part of the release, I'd say that going forward we

Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

2016-08-28 Thread Rakesh Radhakrishnan
OK, I got it. Thanks a lot for the clarification. Rakesh On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Patrick Hunt wrote: > I would say it's acceptable to include 1676 in the release note. IMO we > shouldn't list things in the release notes if they weren't addressed (typ > fixed) in that

Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

2016-08-28 Thread Patrick Hunt
I would say it's acceptable to include 1676 in the release note. IMO we shouldn't list things in the release notes if they weren't addressed (typ fixed) in that release. However in this case I don't see why it's a very big deal - if folks are that interested in the issue they could quickly see (by

Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

2016-08-28 Thread Rakesh Radhakrishnan
Thanks Patrick, I just referred 3.4.6 release note and I could see similar category, ZOOKEEPER-1599 marked resolution as 'Not A Problem' and included in 3.4.6 release note. Should we follow the same pattern and include ZOOKEEPER-1676 also in 3.4.9 release note, please correct me if I missed

Re: Issues with release notes in 3.4.9 RC2 (was: Re: [VOTE] Apache ZooKeeper release 3.4.9 candidate 2)

2016-08-28 Thread Patrick Hunt
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Rakesh Radhakrishnan wrote: > Thanks Flavio for taking the discussion ahead. Thanks Michael for pointing > out these cases. > > >>> Looking at release notes: > >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?p >