It looks to me like everything for 8.6.3 is resolved now 
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SOLR/versions/12348713), and it seems 
from comments in SOLR-14897 and SOLR-14898 that those fixes make a Jetty 
upgrade less compelling to try.

Are there any other issues not currently marked for 8.6.3 we’re waiting for 
before starting the RC?
On Sep 29, 2020, 12:04 PM -0500, Jason Gerlowski <gerlowsk...@gmail.com>, wrote:
> > That said, if someone can use 8.6.3, what’s stopping them from going to 8.7 
> > when it’e released?
>
> The same things that always stop users from going directly to the
> latest-and-greatest: fear of instability from new minor-release
> features, reliance on behavior changed across minor versions, breaking
> changes on Lucene elements that don't guarantee backcompat (e.g.
> SOLR-14254), security issues in later versions (new libraries pulled
> in with vulns), etc. There's lots of reasons a given user might want
> to stick on 8.6.x rather than 8.7 (in the short/medium term).
>
> I'm ambivalent to whether we upgrade Jetty in 8.6.3 - as I said above
> the worst of the Jetty issue should be mitigated by work on our end -
> but I think there's a lot of reasons users might not upgrade as far as
> we'd expect/like.
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 2:05 PM Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> >
> > For me, there’s a sharp distinction between changing a dependency in a 
> > point release just because there’s a new version, and changing the 
> > dependency because there’s a bug in it. That said, if someone can use 
> > 8.6.3, what’s stopping them from going to 8.7 when it’e released? Would it 
> > make more sense to do the upgrades for 8.7 and get that out the door rather 
> > than backport?
> >
> > FWIW,
> > Erick
> >
> > > On Sep 28, 2020, at 1:45 PM, Jason Gerlowski <gerlowsk...@gmail.com> 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey all,
> > >
> > > I wanted to add 2 more blocker tickets to the list: SOLR-14897 and
> > > SOLR-14898. These tickets (while bad bugs in their own right) are
> > > especially necessary because they work around a Jetty buffer-reuse bug
> > > (see SOLR-14896) that causes sporadic request failures once triggered.
> > >
> > > So that brings the list of 8.6.3 blockers up to: SOLR-14850,
> > > SOLR-14835, SOLR-14897, and SOLR-14898. (Thanks David for the quick
> > > work on SOLR-14768!)
> > >
> > > Additionally, should we also consider a Jetty upgrade for 8.6.3 in
> > > light of the issue mentioned above? I know it's atypical for bug-fix
> > > releases to change deps, but here the bug is serious and tied directly
> > > to the dep. SOLR-14897 and SOLR-14898 help greatly here, but the
> > > Jetty bug is likely still a problem for users making requests that
> > > match a specific (albeit rare) profile. Anyone have thoughts?
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Jason
> > >
> > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:28 AM Houston Putman <houstonput...@gmail.com> 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If I recall correctly, thats a step in the release wizard.
> > > >
> > > > After checking, I think this fits the bill:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/dev-tools/scripts/releaseWizard.yaml#L1435
> > > >
> > > > - Houston
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:06 AM David Smiley <dsmi...@apache.org> 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > When moving changes from 8.7 to 8.6.3, must we (the mover of an 
> > > > > individual change) move the CHANGES.txt entry on all branches -- 
> > > > > master, branch_8x, branch_8_6? I expect the release branch but am 
> > > > > unsure of the other two. In the past I have but it's annoying. Does 
> > > > > the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one go? If not, I 
> > > > > think it'd make sense for that to happen.
> > > > >
> > > > > ~ David Smiley
> > > > > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> > > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:22 AM Atri Sharma <a...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom 
> > > > > > to
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > do the 8.6.3 release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski 
> > > > > > <gerlowsk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as 
> > > > > > > possible.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 
> > > > > > > by
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > proposing a bug-fix release. But the reasons make sense given what
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > others mentioned above.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we 
> > > > > > > > really need to wait one week?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > There's no special reason on my end. I suggested a week to give
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > others time to backport anything they wanted included, but I'm 
> > > > > > > happy
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > to start the process as soon as all the expected changes land.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jason
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:48 AM Anshum Gupta 
> > > > > > > <ans...@anshumgupta.net> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition 
> > > > > > > > to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists 
> > > > > > > > our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 
> > > > > > > > 'News' page.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 
> > > > > > > > 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make 
> > > > > > > > things easier for the RMs and community.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley 
> > > > > > > > <dsmi...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3! I recently 
> > > > > > > > > fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a 
> > > > > > > > > regression I introduced). If you can't do the release or need 
> > > > > > > > > help, I will take over. It's the least I can offer in 
> > > > > > > > > repentance for the regression.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ~ David Smiley
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski 
> > > > > > > > > <gerlowsk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that 
> > > > > > > > > > caused
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > problems for some of my usecases. I wanted to volunteer as 
> > > > > > > > > > RM for an
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't 
> > > > > > > > > > ready for some
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > of the bigger changes in 8.7
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to 
> > > > > > > > > > give others a
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, 
> > > > > > > > > > with an RC
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > to follow shortly. Does anyone have any concerns with that 
> > > > > > > > > > plan, or
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 
> > > > > > > > > > 8.6.3 goes out?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Jason
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Anshum Gupta
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Atri
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Apache Concerted
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
>

Reply via email to