Regarding GEODE-5594, though the current implementation is good and needed
more coverage.

While adding tests to cover negative cases, I found something about JDK's
default implementation of
hostname validation which I am not happy about and so it needs a rethought.
It could result in
implementing our own custom algorithm to do hostname validation.

I will send out details and seek to advise on what we should do in a
different thread.

Sai

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:52 AM Alexander Murmann <amurm...@pivotal.io>
wrote:

> To summarize where we are right now in this discussion, I see the following
> tickets listed in this thread as want-to-haves for 1.7:
>
>    - GEODE-5615 - ✅ resolved
>    - GEODE-5601 - 🏃‍♀️ in progress
>    - GEODE-5594 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
>    - GEODE-5338 - 🏃‍♀️ waiting for PR review
>    - GEODE-5619 - 🙄 in progress in JIRA but has merged PR. What does it
>    mean?
>
> Is there anything else that needs to go into 1.7?
>
> It seems like the best we all can do is to review Sai's PRs. Is that
> correct?
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Jens Deppe <jde...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > I'd also like to include GEODE-5619
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:59 PM Xiaojian Zhou <gz...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > The release will be a great one with so many historical bugs fixed.
> > >
> > > Today I tried to use IJ to build and run with latest build.gradle and
> > > recent moved test packages, it worked. So this refactoring is also
> > success.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I most definitely agree!
> > > >
> > > > Anthony
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Aug 21, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I think we do want to wait for GEODE-5615 (DistributedTest OOMEs)
> and
> > > > > GEODE-5601 (AcceptanceTest port conflicts) to be fixed before
> cutting
> > > the
> > > > > new 1.7 branch. It would be better if we don't create a release
> > branch
> > > > from
> > > > > a point where we have these systematic issues with our pipeline.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Dan
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to