Hello everyone, I would appreciate help with with following for 8.9 release:

   1. *Release Highlights*. I gave it a try for Lucene (but I don't have
   experience to judge what qualifies as a release highlight, so please
   edit/remove/add). Edits can be done here: Lucene Release Note 8.9
   <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/LUCENE/ReleaseNote89>,
   Solr Release Note 8.9
   <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SOLR/ReleaseNote89>.
   2.  Resolve failures in Lucene-Solr-SmokeRelease-8.9,  currently fails
   with an error:

   [smoker]   File
"/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/Lucene/Lucene-Solr-SmokeRelease-8.9/dev-tools/scripts/smokeTestRelease.py",
line 125, in noJavaPackageClasses
   [smoker]     raise RuntimeError('%s contains sheisty class "%s"' %
(desc, name2))
   [smoker] RuntimeError: JAR file
"/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/Lucene/Lucene-Solr-SmokeRelease-8.9/lucene/build/smokeTestRelease/tmp/unpack/solr-8.9.0/contrib/gcs-repository/lib/jsr305-3.0.2.jar"
contains sheisty class "javax/annotation/CheckForNull.class"


Thank you in advance.

On Fri, Jun 4, 2021 at 9:40 AM Jan Høydahl <[email protected]> wrote:

> SOLR-15316 / PR 2502 is now merged to branch_8_9
>
> Jan
>
> 3. jun. 2021 kl. 20:53 skrev Mayya Sharipova <
> [email protected]>:
>
> I can wait till this PR 2502 is backported (hopefully by tomorrow? and
> hopefully will be the last item to wait for).
> And tomorrow I will try to build a RC.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 8:57 AM Cassandra Targett <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> It’s OK with me, but I’m not really in a position to understand the
>> changes and/or test it. And while we have a branch, I’m not clear on when
>> the first RC is planned, so Mayya should weigh in I think.
>>
>> Cassandra
>> On Jun 3, 2021, 5:49 AM -0500, Jan Høydahl <[email protected]>,
>> wrote:
>>
>> Mayya, Cassandra, I'd like to merge the Jetty upgrade, SOLR-15316 to
>> branch_8x and branch_8_9. See backport PR
>> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2502
>> Is that ok?
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> 2. jun. 2021 kl. 01:00 skrev Jan Høydahl <[email protected]>:
>>
>> Cassandra,
>>
>> Thanks for spotting the Jetty JIRA (SOLR-15316
>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15316>). I put up a quck PR
>> <https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/157> for upgrading Jetty
>> to 9.4.41.v20210516. Currently running all tests.
>> Due to the CVEs I think there should not be a new Solr release without
>> this upgrade. I set fixVersion to 8.9 and kept the blocker. If anyone
>> disagrees, speak out.
>>
>> There's always a risk of a new Jetty version introducing new bugs, but
>> this is a minor version upgrade with (almost) exclusively bug fixes since
>> 9.4.36, so I'm willing to take the risk if tests look good. Perhaps Jenkins
>> gets a few test spins on main before the 8.9 release too. Whyt Mayya?
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> 1. jun. 2021 kl. 23:04 skrev Cassandra Targett <[email protected]>:
>>
>> I got a question this morning about some Jetty CVEs that look to be fixed
>> with Jetty 9.4.39, and there’s an issue marked as a Blocker (with no
>> version) to upgrade to that version. Is there time to do that for 8.9? Or
>> is it too high risk or would take too long?
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15316
>>
>> Sorry, I’m way behind on mailing lists and didn’t see the branch had been
>> cut already!
>>
>> Cassandra
>> On Jun 1, 2021, 3:54 PM -0500, Jan Høydahl <[email protected]>,
>> wrote:
>>
>> Let's not hold up the release due to this incomplete PR. It obviously
>> needs more time for completion and there is always a new train to catch.
>> As far as I understand, Circuit breakers are pluggable, so anyone can
>> configure their own implementation in the meantime?
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> 1. jun. 2021 kl. 22:13 skrev Atri Sharma <[email protected]>:
>>
>> I appreciate you fixing this and adding the new circuit breaker and look
>> forward to having it in the hands of our users soon.
>>
>> However, the current state of PR, with significant API churn for a single
>> change and overlapping code is not yet ready.
>>
>> If this is too much of a rework, I am happy to take the existing PR and
>> do the changes, post which I believe the PR should be close to completion.
>>
>> Let me know if you need me to help, but unfortunately, the two objections
>> I raised are blockers, atleast until we establish that they cannot be done
>> away with.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 2 Jun 2021, 01:37 Walter Underwood, <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I would appreciate a second opinion on the pull request. Substantive
>>> issues have been resolved. At this point, the discussion is about code
>>> style and coding standards. I don’t have detailed knowledge about the Solr
>>> coding style, so I’d appreciate another set of eyes.
>>>
>>> The current behavior is buggy, and we are not able to use it at Chegg.
>>> The patch fixes those bugs.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/96
>>>
>>> wunder
>>> Walter Underwood
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://observer.wunderwood.org/  (my blog)
>>>
>>> On Jun 1, 2021, at 12:27 PM, Walter Underwood <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I answered the comments. I don’t see those answers on github, oddly.
>>>
>>> I’ll re-answer them. Most of your questions are already answered in the
>>> discussion on Jira.
>>>
>>> I central issues is that load average is not always a CPU measure. In
>>> some systems, it includes threads in iowait. So it is potentially
>>> misleading to label it as CPU and document it as CPU. The updated
>>> documentation makes that clear, so that should have already answered your
>>> comment. that is why it is important to rename the existing circuit breaker.
>>>
>>> wunder
>>> Walter Underwood
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://observer.wunderwood.org/  (my blog)
>>>
>>> On Jun 1, 2021, at 12:20 PM, Atri Sharma <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I tool a look at the PR and gave comments for SOLR-15056, and the last I
>>> checked, my comments were not addressed?
>>>
>>> On Wed, 2 Jun 2021, 00:31 Walter Underwood, <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Could someone else please take a look at SOLR-15056? This is a small
>>>> blast radius change that improves the circuit breakers. It includes unit
>>>> tests and documentation and has been ready since January.
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/apache/solr/pull/96/files
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15056
>>>>
>>>> wunder
>>>> Walter Underwood
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://observer.wunderwood.org/  (my blog)
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 1, 2021, at 11:53 AM, Mayya Sharipova <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the update, Houston.
>>>>
>>>> I've started the release process, the branch 8.9 is now cut.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 1, 2021 at 11:21 AM Houston Putman <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mayya, SOLR-14978 is now in 8.x. So no longer a blocker.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Houston
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 11:42 PM David Smiley <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> SOLR-15412 is rather serious as the title suggests.  I haven't been
>>>>>> tracking the progress so if it's already resolved, that's unknown to me 
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> isn't reflected in JIRA.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ~ David Smiley
>>>>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 5:24 PM Mayya Sharipova <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>>>> I wonder if everyone is ok for May 31st (Monday) as the date for the
>>>>>>> feature freeze date and branch cut?
>>>>>>> I've noticed that `releaseWizard.py` is also asking for the length
>>>>>>> of feature freeze. What is the custom length to put there?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looks like Lucene
>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/LUCENE/versions/12349562>
>>>>>>> doesn't have any unresolved issues for 8.9.
>>>>>>> SOLR
>>>>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SOLR/versions/12349563>
>>>>>>>  has:
>>>>>>> -  SOLR-15412  Strict validation on Replica metadata can cause
>>>>>>> complete outage  (Looks like it may be resolved already?)
>>>>>>> - SOLR-15410 GC log is directed to console when starting Solr with
>>>>>>> Java 11 Open J9 on Windows
>>>>>>> - SOLR-15056  CPU circuit breaker needs to use CPU utilization, not
>>>>>>> Unix load average
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are we ok to postpone these issues to later releases if they are not
>>>>>>> resolved and merged before feature freeze?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:41 PM Colvin Cowie <
>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>> Eric was going to have a look at the PR.
>>>>>>>> But if it isn't done in time then I don't think it needs to block
>>>>>>>> the release
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 25 May 2021 at 15:50, Mayya Sharipova <
>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hello Colvin,
>>>>>>>>> I am wondering if you still want to merge SOLR-15410 for the
>>>>>>>>> Lucene/Solr 8.9 release?
>>>>>>>>> Should we have a deadline for feature freeze? Say May 30th
>>>>>>>>> (Sunday)?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thank you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 8:49 AM Noble Paul <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 9:30 PM Colvin Cowie <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Hello,
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > I raised SOLR-15410 yesterday with a PR to fix an issue with GC
>>>>>>>>>> logging when using new versions of OpenJ9. It's small, so if 
>>>>>>>>>> somebody could
>>>>>>>>>> have a look at it in time for 8.9 that would be great
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> > Colvin
>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> > On Thu, 13 May 2021 at 17:52, Nhat Nguyen <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> Hi Mayya,
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> I would like to backport LUCENE-9935, which enables bulk-merge
>>>>>>>>>> for stored fields with index sort, to 8.x this weekend. The patch is 
>>>>>>>>>> ready,
>>>>>>>>>> but we prefer to give CI some cycles before backporting. Please let 
>>>>>>>>>> me know
>>>>>>>>>> if it's okay with the release plan.
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>> >> Nhat
>>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 12:44 PM Gus Heck <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>> Perhaps https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-15378
>>>>>>>>>> should be investigated before 8.9, maybe make it a blocker?
>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>> On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 1:35 AM Robert Muir <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> Mayya, I created backport for Adrien's issue here, to try to
>>>>>>>>>> help out:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/pull/2495
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> Personally, I felt that merging non-trivial changes from
>>>>>>>>>> main branch
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> to 8.x has some additional risks when cherry-picking:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> * structural changes in main branch making merging more
>>>>>>>>>> difficult
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> (e.g. LUCENE-9705 reorganization of codec versioning, great
>>>>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> moving forwards though)
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> * there are many style changes due to spotless in main
>>>>>>>>>> branch which
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> add noise to merging against old code.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> * In the specific case of LUCENE-9827, the usual additional
>>>>>>>>>> tricky
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> backwards compatibility for 8.x must be added in the
>>>>>>>>>> backport (due to
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> minor version bumps there) which can go wrong.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> I still think that particular change is worth considering
>>>>>>>>>> for 8.9, it
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> isn't just a performance bug but also a huge improvement to
>>>>>>>>>> test
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> coverage that helps combat risks.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> But we should still take some precautions when releasing an
>>>>>>>>>> 8.x IMO:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> * be mindful of what we are backporting and the risks
>>>>>>>>>> involved: it is harder.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> * try to let jenkins bake changes in 8.x branches for longer
>>>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> usual? even a few days really helps.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 1:29 PM Mayya Sharipova
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> > Thanks everyone,
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> > Adrien, I  am happy to try to be a release manager for
>>>>>>>>>> this release.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> > Adrien, and Gus, please let me know when your changes are
>>>>>>>>>> merged to 8.x
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:38 AM Gus Heck <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >> I'm also looking to find time to get
>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-14597 into some sort
>>>>>>>>>> of 8x. I've recently completed the back port of 2/3 of the lucene 
>>>>>>>>>> tickets
>>>>>>>>>> that are related, and hope to work on the third tomorrow....
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >> I had some feedback there, but I think folks were waiting
>>>>>>>>>> for the version integrated with the final form of the Lucene tickets 
>>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>>> delving further. Hopefully this week I can start on a patch that 
>>>>>>>>>> does that.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >> On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 10:25 AM Adrien Grand <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> I would like to backport LUCENE-9827 before we release
>>>>>>>>>> 8.9, a performance regression to stored fields merges. I'll work on 
>>>>>>>>>> this as
>>>>>>>>>> soon as possible.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 10:28 PM Adrien Grand <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> Mayya, are you volunteering to be the release manager?
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> Le jeu. 6 mai 2021 à 18:06, Ishan Chattopadhyaya <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 7:50 PM Mayya Sharipova <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> I was wondering if we can have a 8.9.0 release. It
>>>>>>>>>> has been more than 3 months since 8.8.0 was released.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> 8.9.0 doesn't need to be the last release in the 8.x
>>>>>>>>>> series.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> --
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>> Adrien
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >> --
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work)
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> >> http://www.the111shift.com (play)
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>>> >>> --
>>>>>>>>>> >>> http://www.needhamsoftware.com (work)
>>>>>>>>>> >>> http://www.the111shift.com (play)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> Noble Paul
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to