+1 to cutting without Given the back and forth we have seen on the TLS change, I'd rather avoid rushing it.
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Perhaps we should cut 1.7.0 without these changes to give us more time to > review and complete the work. > > Thoughts? > > Anthony > > > > On Aug 31, 2018, at 8:03 AM, Sai Boorlagadda <sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > I haven't yet merged GEODE-5338. The PR changes the existing behavior and > > is not acceptable. > > Working on changing the implementation to have a default value derived > > based on how user > > wants to configure SSL. > > > > Sai > > > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 11:45 AM Sai Boorlagadda < > sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> I have merged GEODE-5594 to develop. > >> > >> GEODE-5338 is now waiting for PR review and precheckin. > >> > >> Sai > >> > >> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:30 AM Sai Boorlagadda < > >> sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> GEODE-5338 is downvoted for the security concerns related to trusting > >>> the default trust store and thus resulted in an improvement to add a > >>> hostname > >>> validation as a feature before we can support trusting default trust > >>> store. > >>> > >>> So GEODE-5338 is blocked by GEODE-5594. > >>> > >>> Once I merge GEODE-5594, I will reinitiate review on GEODE-5338 PR. > >>> > >>> Sai > >>> > >>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexander Murmann < > amurm...@pivotal.io> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Looks like we are now waiting for these tickets: > >>>> > >>>> GEODE-5601 which is a dup of GEODE-5590 which has this open PR: > >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2368. > >>>> GEODE-5594 has open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346 > >>>> GEODE-5338 <https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346GEODE-5338> has > >>>> open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2244. > >>>> > >>>> Does this look right? > >>>> > >>>> The GEODE-5338 ticket is the most concerning to me right now. The PR > was > >>>> down voted, had some down voted discussion and nothing since. Sai > >>>> mentioned > >>>> yesterday that this might be able to merge. That's surprising given > the > >>>> downvotes and lack of discussion. Sai, do you want to give us a > update, > >>>> maybe on the PR? > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Juan José Ramos <jra...@pivotal.io> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Thanks!! > >>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:13 AM Nabarun Nag <n...@apache.org> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Juan, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> GEODE-5618 as PR#2360 has been merged in to develop. The new branch > >>>> has > >>>>> not > >>>>>> yet been created hence this fix will be in 1.7.0 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Regards > >>>>>> Nabarun Nag > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM Juan José Ramos <jra...@pivotal.io > > > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hello team, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Can we also include GEODE-5618 in the next release?. The pull > >>>> request > >>>>> has > >>>>>>> been approved already, it just needs to be merged. > >>>>>>> Best regards. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:45 PM Bruce Schuchardt < > >>>>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> great! thanks > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 1:42 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote: > >>>>>>>>> I completely agree. Once the branch is created, it will > >>>> undergo all > >>>>>>>>> compatibility and upgrade tests. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> The commit that you have mentioned will be reverted in 1.7.0, > >>>> as > >>>>> well > >>>>>>> as > >>>>>>>>> any related commits > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Regards > >>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Bruce Schuchardt < > >>>>>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's as easy as doing a rebase. Someone added > >>>> the > >>>>> 1.8 > >>>>>>>>>> version to Version.java and we need to revert that. We also > >>>> need > >>>>> to > >>>>>>> see > >>>>>>>>>> if it's being used anywhere for backward-compatibility. If > >>>> it's > >>>>> in > >>>>>>> use > >>>>>>>>>> those changes need to be examined and probably undone on the > >>>>> branch > >>>>>> if > >>>>>>>>>> they're targeting 1.7 peers/clients. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 12:11 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> @Bruce those changes were done when 1.7.0 release process was > >>>>>>>>>> in-progress, > >>>>>>>>>>> and a release branch was already created. But we stopped that > >>>>>> process > >>>>>>>> mid > >>>>>>>>>>> way. This happened in May 2018. > >>>>>>>>>>> We are planning to rebase the 1.7.0 brach with the current > >>>>> develop > >>>>>>>> pretty > >>>>>>>>>>> soon. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Regards > >>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM Bruce Schuchardt < > >>>>>>>>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we've cut a 1.7.0 release branch that says its > >>>>>> 1.8.0. > >>>>>>>> Is > >>>>>>>>>>>> that intentional? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> private static final byte GEODE_180_ORDINAL =95; > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> public static final VersionGEODE_180 = > >>>>>>>>>>>> new Version("GEODE","1.8.0", (byte)1, (byte)8, > >>>> (byte)0, > >>>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,GEODE_180_ORDINAL); > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 9:50 AM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> After reading through the weekend, validating against CN > >>>> as a > >>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback should be acceptable and dont have any further > >>>>> concerns > >>>>>>>>>>>>> with default JDK's implementation as expressed[1]. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Planning to merge GEODE-5594 today and following with > >>>>> GEODE-5338. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/906540e18fa6f85fc77c88c28fc74a > >>>>> 61402471d2eed4ee9dab4813c9@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM Sai Boorlagadda < > >>>>>>>>>>>> sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella > >>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer > >>>>>>> Email: jra...@pivotal.io > >>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611> > >>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066> > >>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269> > >>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 - 16:00 GMT > >>>>>>> How to upload artifacts: > >>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073 > >>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket: > >>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image: twitter] > >>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin] > >>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image: facebook] > >>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google plus] > >>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube] > >>>>>>> < > >>>>>> > >>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_ > eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella > >>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer > >>>>> Email: jra...@pivotal.io > >>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 > >>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 > >>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 > >>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 - 16:00 GMT > >>>>> How to upload artifacts: > >>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073 > >>>>> How to escalate a ticket: > >>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556 > >>>>> > >>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image: twitter] > >>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin] > >>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image: facebook] > >>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google plus] > >>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube] > >>>>> < > >>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_ > eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >
