Same here. I have started with RC2 but can mostly carry findings to RC3 given only one additional change.
> On Feb 12, 2016, at 8:56 AM, Elliott Clark <ecl...@apache.org> wrote: > > -1 until the dataloss is fixed. > > But assuming that's fixed I would be good for a short vote cycle for the > next RC. > >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 张铎 <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> HBASE-15252 is fixed :). >> >> 2016-02-12 14:00 GMT+08:00 Stack <st...@duboce.net>: >> >>> -1 >>> >>> The dataloss issue was just discovered. I think now we know of it, even >>> though the incidence is rare, would be best to respin the RC. >>> >>> You the man Sean, >>> St.Ack >>> >>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Sean Busbey <sean.bus...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> On Feb 11, 2016 18:33, "张铎" <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Should we include HBASE-15252? It is a data loss issue. >>>>> >>>>> It's marked major (though perhaps that's off since it's dataloss, even >>> if >>>>> rare). More importantly it's been present in prior releases for some >>> time. >>>>> >>>>> Blocking 1.2.0 would put pressure on getting a solution faster, I >> think. >>>>> Additionally, letting the fix wait for 1.2.1 will give me a good >>> incentive >>>>> to keep the path releases on schedule. ;) >>>>> >>>>> My 2¢. Happy to roll another RC if folks see it otherwise. >>>> >>>> Dataloss. I think we should roll a new RC with short voting timeframe. >>>> St.Ack >>
