I am about to take the plunge and start deferring all JIRA issues
currently targeted to 3.5.2 into 3.5.3.  I will likely start doing this
sometime around 12 noon PST on Tuesday, 6/21.  Nearly every issue in this
list will be deferred:

https://s.apache.org/Y0jP

I know we have a few blocker and critical issues still under active code
review that we want for 3.5.2.  I'll keep those in.

--Chris Nauroth




On 5/12/16, 2:44 PM, "Patrick Hunt" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Hi Chris. +1 on that. I believe it's imperative that we get 3.5.2-alpha
>out
>and continue to drive towards stability. I'll work with Michael to get
>2405
>finalized.
>
>Patrick
>
>On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Chris Nauroth <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>> When we last discussed a ZooKeeper 3.5.2-alpha release candidate, we
>> wanted to take time to knock down current blocker and critical issues.
>> Since then, we've heard interest from multiple users that they would
>>like
>> to see a 3.5.2-alpha release soon.  At this point, I'd like to push the
>> majority of remaining open issues ahead to 3.5.3 in the interest of
>> expediting a release candidate.
>>
>> I currently see 12 blockers and 18 criticals remaining targeted to
>>3.5.2.
>> I count 67 fixed issues already committed for 3.5.2, and I think that's
>> plenty of content to justify proceeding with a release.  I'd like to ask
>> everyone to please consider pushing your issues ahead to 3.5.3 and limit
>> the remaining 3.5.2 issues only to what you consider to be must-haves.
>> Speaking for myself, I think the really important remaining ones are
>> ZOOKEEPER-2366 (hampers uptake of dynamic reconfig), ZOOKEEPER-2380
>> (potential stability problem) and ZOOKEEPER-2405 (security risk).  I
>>will
>> focus my code review time on these, but I could even be convinced to
>>defer
>> these.
>>
>> Please keep in mind that we can aim for a quicker 3.5.3-alpha release
>> after this if your favorite issue doesn't quite make it into
>>3.5.2-alpha.
>>
>> Please let me know your thoughts on the plan, and thank you.
>>
>> --Chris Nauroth
>>

Reply via email to