Thanks for the clarity, Jonathan. I agree that an August 3.8 release target sounds like the most reasonable option, at this point in time.
With Sylvain's binding -1, this vote has failed. -- Kind regards, Michael Shuler On 07/21/2016 05:33 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: > I feel like the calendar is relevant though because if we delay 3.8 more > we're looking at a week, maybe 10 days before 3.9 is scheduled. Which > doesn't give us much time for the stabilizing we're supposed to do in 3.9. > > All in all I think I agree that releasing 3.8 in August is less confusing > than skipping it entirely. And I don't like the idea of ignoring a whole > bunch of test failures and hoping they don't mean anything, because we just > had that thread about getting more rigorous about tests, not less. > > So I would recommend we go ahead and fix this before releasing, and to > avoid a super compressed 3.9 window either retarget 3.8 for August, or 3.9 > for September. > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> What we’d usually do is revert the offending ticket and push it to the >> next release, if this indeed were significant enough. >> >> So option 4 would be to revert CDC fast (painful) and ship. >> Option 5 would be to quickly fix the issue, retag, and revote, with 3.9 >> still following up on schedule. >> Option 6 would be to ignore the calendar entirely. Fix or revert the issue >> eventually, and release 3.8 then. Have 3.9 and 3.0.9 out at whatever time >> we decide to, and go back to monthly cycles from there on. >> >> TBH I don’t think anybody is even going to notice, or care. So I’m fine >> with 1, 4, 5, 6, but not reverting my +1 so far. >> >> -- >> AY >> >> On 21 July 2016 at 14:46:17, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com) >> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I see the alternatives as: >>> >>> 1. Release this as 3.8 >>> 2. Skip 3.8 and release 3.9 next month on schedule >>> 3. Skip this month and release 3.8 next month instead >>> >> >> I've hopefully made it clear I don't really like 1. I'm totally fine with >> either 2 or 3 though (with a very very small preference for 3. because I >> suspect skipping a release might confuse a few users, but also knowing that >> 2. has the small advantage of keeping the 3.0.x and 3.x versions released >> more or less in lockstep). >> >> >> >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 8:19 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko <alek...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I still think the issue is minor enough, and with 3.8 being extremely >>>> delayed, and being a non-odd release, at that, we’d be better off just >>>> pushing it. >>>> >>>> Also, I know we’ve been easy on -1s when voting on releases, but I want >>> to >>>> remind people in general that release votes can not be vetoed and only >>>> require a majority of binding votes, >>>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes >>>> >>>> -- >>>> AY >>>> >>>> On 21 July 2016 at 08:57:22, Sylvain Lebresne (sylv...@datastax.com) >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Sorry but I'm (binding) -1 on this because of >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12236. >>>> >>>> I disagree that knowingly releasing a version that will temporarily >> break >>>> in-flight queries during upgrade, even if it's for a very short >>> time-frame >>>> until re-connection, is ok. I'll note in particular that in the test >>>> report, there is 74! failures in the upgrade tests (for reference the >> 3.7 >>>> test report had only 2 upgrade tests failure both with open tickets). >>> Given >>>> that we have a known problem during upgrade, I don't really buy the "We >>> are >>>> assuming these are due to a recent downsize in instance size that these >>>> tests run on" and that suggest to me the problem is not too minor. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Dave Brosius < >> dbros...@mebigfatguy.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 07/20/2016 05:48 PM, Michael Shuler wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.8. >>>>>> >>>>>> sha1: c3ded0551f538f7845602b27d53240cd8129265c >>>>>> Git: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.8-tentative >>>>>> Artifacts: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.8/ >>>>>> Staging repository: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1123/ >>>>>> >>>>>> The debian packages are available here: >>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~mshuler/ >>>>>> >>>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed). >>>>>> >>>>>> [1]: http://goo.gl/oGNH0i (CHANGES.txt) >>>>>> [2]: http://goo.gl/KjMtUn (NEWS.txt) >>>>>> [3]: https://goo.gl/TxVLKo (3.8 Test Summary) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jonathan Ellis >>> Project Chair, Apache Cassandra >>> co-founder, http://www.datastax.com >>> @spyced >>> >> > > >
