Sorry for the long delay but I burnt my hand and so have been MIA. It's better now so I'll port the issues and cut an RC on Wednesday.
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Anshum Gupta <ans...@anshumgupta.net> wrote: > I've added the section for 5.3.2 in all the branches. Kindly back-port > stuff that you think makes sense to go into a 'bug-fix' release for 5.3.1 > only. > > I think it'd make sense to duplicate entries for JIRAs we back port. > > On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Anshum Gupta <ans...@anshumgupta.net> > wrote: > >> Seems like Noble ran addVersion.py for 5.3.2 on the lucene_solr_5_3 >> branch during the 5.3.1 release. >> I can now run it for branch_5x and trunk with the old change id but there >> are a ton of property changes to multiple files. Can someone confirm that >> it'd be fine? The addVersion on 5.3.2, that I'm trying to merge onto >> branch_5x and trunk was done before 5.4 was released. >> >> Also, the change log entry for 5.3.2 is right above 5.3.1 and not >> chronological i.e. at the top. I think that is how it should be unless >> someone has some different ideas. >> >> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 2:42 AM, Shawn Heisey <apa...@elyograg.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On 12/16/2015 1:08 PM, Anshum Gupta wrote: >>> > There are a bunch of important bug fixes that call for a 5.3.2 in my >>> > opinion. I'm specifically talking about security plugins related fixes >>> > but I'm sure there are others too. >>> > >>> > Unless someone else wants to do it, I'd volunteer to do the release >>> > and cut an RC next Tuesday. >>> >>> Sounds like a reasonable idea to me. I assume these must be fixes that >>> are not yet backported. >>> >>> I happen to have the 5.3 branch on my dev system, with SOLR-6188 >>> applied. It is already up to date. There's nothing in the 5.3.2 >>> section of either CHANGES.txt file. The svn log indicates that nothing >>> has been backported since the 5.3.1 release was cut. >>> >>> Perhaps SOLR-6188 could be added to the list of fixes to backport. I >>> believe it's a benign change. >>> >>> Thinking about CHANGES.txt, this might work for the 5.3 branch: >>> >>> ---- >>> ======================= Lucene 5.3.2 ======================= >>> All changes were backported from 5.4.0. >>> >>> Bug Fixes >>> >>> * LUCENE-XXXX: A description (Committer Name) >>> ---- >>> >>> If we decide it's a good idea to mention the release in trunk and >>> branch_5x, something like the following might work, because that file >>> should already contain the full change descriptions: >>> >>> ---- >>> ======================= Lucene 5.3.2 ======================= >>> The following issues were backported from 5.4.0: >>> LUCENE-XXXX >>> LUCENE-YYYY >>> ---- >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Shawn >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Anshum Gupta >> > > > > -- > Anshum Gupta > -- Anshum Gupta
