I posted a PR <https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/775> for the DRILL-5326
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-5326> since it can be blocker
for a new release.

Jinfeng, please take a look at this.

Kind regards
Vitalii

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Zelaine Fong <zf...@mapr.com> wrote:

> It looks like DRILL-5326 has just been logged.  I assume we need this for
> RC0?
>
> Vitalii – it looks like you have a fix.  Can you post a pull request as
> soon as you’re ready with the change.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -- Zelaine
>
> On 3/3/17, 2:13 PM, "Jinfeng Ni" <j...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>     Pushed the patch for DRILL-5313, as well as two other patches which
>     were reviewed before 3/1.
>
>     I will start build RC0 after QA sanity test is completed.
>
>
>     On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 11:00 PM, Jinfeng Ni <j...@apache.org> wrote:
>     > Looks like the C++ client is not able to built successfully [1],
> after
>     > the change of DRILL-5301 / DRILL-5167.
>     >
>     > This seems to be a blocking issue for 1.10.0, and I'll merge the
> patch
>     > once it's verified/reviewed.
>     >
>     > 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-5313
>     >
>     > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Jinfeng Ni <j...@apache.org> wrote:
>     >> I missed 5208, because it did not show up in Paul's list when he
> replied to
>     >> this thread.
>     >>
>     >> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 2:58 PM Zelaine Fong <zf...@mapr.com> wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>> Jinfeng,
>     >>>
>     >>> I notice the following Jira has the ready-to-commit label but
> isn’t on
>     >>> your list:
>     >>>
>     >>> DRILL-5208
>     >>>
>     >>> Was this one overlooked?
>     >>>
>     >>> -- Zelaine
>     >>>
>     >>> On 3/2/17, 1:04 PM, "Jinfeng Ni" <j...@apache.org> wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>>     The following PRs have been merged to Apache master.
>     >>>
>     >>>     DRILL-4994
>     >>>     DRILL-4730
>     >>>     DRILL-5301
>     >>>     DRILL-5167
>     >>>     DRILL-5221
>     >>>     DRILL-5258
>     >>>     DRILL-5034
>     >>>     DRILL-4963
>     >>>     DRILL-5252
>     >>>     DRILL-5266
>     >>>     DRILL-5284
>     >>>     DRILL-5304
>     >>>     DRILL-5290
>     >>>     DRILL-5287
>     >>>
>     >>>     QA folks will run tests. If no issue found, I'll build a RC0
> candidate
>     >>>     for 1.10 and start the vote.
>     >>>
>     >>>     Thanks,
>     >>>
>     >>>     Jinfeng
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>     On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Jinfeng Ni <j...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>     >>>     > I'm building a merge branch, and hopefully push to master
> branch
>     >>> today
>     >>>     > if things go smoothly.
>     >>>     >
>     >>>     >
>     >>>     > On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Padma Penumarthy
>     >>> <ppenumar...@mapr.com> wrote:
>     >>>     >> Hi Jinfeng,
>     >>>     >>
>     >>>     >> Please include DRILL-5287, DRILL-5290 and DRILL-5304.
>     >>>     >>
>     >>>     >> Thanks,
>     >>>     >> Padma
>     >>>     >>
>     >>>     >>
>     >>>     >>> On Feb 22, 2017, at 11:16 PM, Jinfeng Ni <j...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>     >>>     >>>
>     >>>     >>> Hi Drillers,
>     >>>     >>>
>     >>>     >>> It has been almost 3 months since we release Drill 1.9. We
> have
>     >>>     >>> resolved plenty of fixes and improvements (closed around
> 88 JIRAs
>     >>>     >>> [1]). I propose that we start the 1.10 release process,
> and set
>     >>>     >>> Wednesday 3/1 as the cutoff day for code checkin. After
> 3/1, we
>     >>> should
>     >>>     >>> start build a release candidate.
>     >>>     >>>
>     >>>     >>> Please reply in this email thread if you have something
> near
>     >>> complete
>     >>>     >>> and you would like to include in 1.10 release.
>     >>>     >>>
>     >>>     >>> I volunteer as the release manager, unless someone else
> come
>     >>> forward.
>     >>>     >>>
>     >>>     >>> Thanks,
>     >>>     >>>
>     >>>     >>> Jinfeng
>     >>>     >>>
>     >>>     >>> [1]
>     >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL/fixforversion/12338769
>     >>>     >>
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>
>
>
>

Reply via email to