On 30 June 2014 22:26, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > Also, does anyone have an idea where we stand with the c client and > windows support? I see the build job is passing on trunk. Are folks > able to successfully use that client? > > I see the c client on linux failing in some new ways, recent change? > > [exec] Zookeeper_operations::testConcurrentOperations1 : > assertion : elapsed 24 > [exec] /bin/bash: line 5: 11205 Segmentation fault > > ZKROOT=/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/ZooKeeper-trunk/trunk/src/c/../.. > CLASSPATH=$CLASSPATH:$CLOVER_HOME/lib/clover.jar ${dir}$tst > [exec] Zookeeper_multi::testCreateFAIL: zktest-mt >
I wonder if related to: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1933 -rgs > > Patrick > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Flavio, do you think those jiras can get reviewed/finalized before > > the end of the week? I'd like to try cutting an RC soonish... > > > > Patrick > > > > On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 5:02 AM, Flavio Junqueira > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 for the plan of releasing alpha versions. > >> > >> I'd like to have ZK-1818 (ZK-1810) and ZK-1863 in. They are both patch > available. ZK-1870 is in trunk, but it is still open because we need a 3.4 > patch. > >> > >> -Flavio > >> > >> > >> On 26 Jun 2014, at 01:07, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> Hey folks, we've been talking about it for a while, a few people have > >>> mentioned on the list as well as contacted me personally that they > >>> would like to see some progress on the first 3.5 release. Every > >>> release is a compromise, if we wait for perfection we'll never get > >>> anything out the door. 3.5 has tons of great new features, lots of > >>> hard work, let's get it out in a release so that folks can use it, > >>> test it, and give feedback. > >>> > >>> Jenkins jobs have been pretty stable except for the known flakey test > >>> ZOOKEEPER-1870 which Flavio committed today to trunk. Note that > >>> jenkins has also been verifying the code on jdk7 and jdk8. > >>> > >>> Here's my thinking again on how we should plan our releases: > >>> > >>> I don't think we'll be able to do a 3.5.x-stable for some time. What I > >>> think we should do instead is similar to what we did for 3.4. (this is > >>> also similar to what Hadoop did during their Hadoop 2 release cycle) > >>> Start with a series of alpha releases, something people can run and > >>> test with, once we address all the blockers and feel comfortable with > >>> the apis & remaining jiras we then switch to beta. Once we get some > >>> good feedback we remove the alpha/beta moniker and look at making it > >>> "stable'. At some later point it will become the "current/stable" > >>> release, taking over from 3.4.x. > >>> > >>> e.g. > >>> 3.5.0-alpha (8 blockers) > >>> 3.5.1-alpha (3 blockers) > >>> 3.5.2-alpha (0 blockers) > >>> 3.5.3-beta (apis locked) > >>> 3.5.4-beta > >>> 3.5.5-beta > >>> 3.5.6 (no longer considered alpha/beta but also not "stable" vs 3.4.x, > >>> maybe use it for production but we still expect things to shake out) > >>> 3.5.7 > >>> .... > >>> 3.5.x - ready to replace 3.4 releases for production use, stable, > etc... > >>> > >>> There are 8 blockers currently, are any of these something that should > >>> hold up 3.5.0-alpha? > >>> > >>> I'll hold open the discussion for a couple days. If folks find this a > >>> reasonable plan I'll start the ball rolling to cut an RC. > >>> > >>> Patrick > >> >
