Enrico, yes. We will try to include the jiras that already have pull requests.
- Sijie On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 12:41 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > Would it be possible to include BOOKKEEPER-896: VM-local transport in 4.4.0 > ? > > Thanks, > Enrico > > 2016-03-14 17:52 GMT+01:00 Matteo Merli <matteo.me...@gmail.com>: > > > Flavio, > > > > I think there are some substantial improvements in some areas, here are > few > > examples of non bug-fix changes: > > > > BOOKKEEPER-841: Bookie should calculate ledgers map writing a new entry > log > > file > > (Save a lot a read IO on bookie restart with at lot of data stored) > > > > BOOKKEEPER-889: BookKeeper client should try not to use bookies with > > errors/timeouts when forming a new ensemble > > (Quarantine bookies for a period of time if they are slow/misbehaving) > > > > BOOKKEEPER-895: GC ledgers that are no longer a part of the ensemble > > (Remove extra copies of ledgers already auto-replicated) > > > > BOOKKEEPER-894: add command to read ledger entries form shell > > BOOKKEEPER-892: Bookie sanity test > > > > These other changes have no immediate user benefit, but pose the base for > > further changes: > > > > BOOKKEEPER-851: Configurable LedgerStorage implementation > > BOOKKEEPER-901: Authentication framework > > > > (This was just from the changes we submitted from Yahoo branch, I think > > there are other non-bug fix change since 4.2) > > > > Matteo > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 3:33 AM Flavio Junqueira <f...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Thanks, Sijie and Matteo, for working on this. Even though I'd like to > > see > > > 4.4.0 out, if all it contains are bug fixes, then we shouldn't cut a > new > > > branch. What is it that you guys are planning on having that justifies > > > cutting a new branch? > > > > > > -Flavio > > > > > > > On 14 Mar 2016, at 06:16, Sijie Guo <si...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello: > > > > > > > > Matteo and I had a discussion about releases. Release 4.4.0 is kind > of > > > > taking too long. So we'd like to cut release 4.4.0 based on whatever > we > > > > have that are marked for 4.4.0, targeting on end of this month. > Matteo > > > > would like to drive this release. > > > > > > > > We'd like to start planning 4.5.0. I will start another thread for > > that. > > > > > > > > Here are the 4.4.0 jiras that are not resolved yet after I cleaned > up. > > > > Could the owners of those jiras help updating the statuses of those > > > tickets? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20BOOKKEEPER%20AND%20status%20in%20%28Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%29%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%204.4.0%20ORDER%20BY%20updated%20DESC%2C%20priority%20DESC%2C%20created%20ASC > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Sijie > > > > > > > > >
