Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Adrien Grand]

I just disabled the Apache Jenkins builds for 8.5.

On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 2:04 PM Adrien Grand  wrote:

> Solr doesn't use addIndexes(Directory) so this is not relevant to Solr
> indeed.
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:40 AM Ignacio Vera  wrote:
>
>> I updated the Solr's release announcement so there is no changes. I think
>> the Lucene's bug fix is not relevant for Solr.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:23 AM Jan Høydahl 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If RC1 is released with a non-working SOLR-14359, then please change
>>> Solr’s release announcement. Not sure whether the Lucene-bugfix is valid
>>> for Solr users, in that case it can be highlighted instead?
>>>
>>> Jan
>>>
>>> 7. apr. 2020 kl. 10:13 skrev Ignacio Vera :
>>>
>>> Here are the drafts for the release notes, let me know if there is
>>> something you wish to change:
>>>
>>> Lucene:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/resumedraft.action?draftId=148645634=e835ddb5-3bb9-4b33-b6ad-1770e0a95327=shareui=1586247034772
>>>
>>> Solr:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/resumedraft.action?draftId=148645636=c4a8eb5f-08d0-40db-a877-b94adb383061=shareui=1586247001694
>>>
>>> As I reminder I am planning to build the first RC tomorrow, Wednesday
>>> April 8th.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:37 AM Ignacio Vera  wrote:
>>>
  Thanks Jan,  I see SOLR-14359
  has already
 been back ported to branch 8.5, I am ok with  SOLR-14317
  backporting as
 well. I am planning to build the first RC this coming Wednesday. Let me
 know if that works for you.



 On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 12:25 AM Jan Høydahl 
 wrote:

> Also this coould be a backport candidate: SOLR-14317
>  
> HttpClusterStateProvider
> throws exception when only one node down
>
> Jan
>
> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 22:29 skrev Jan Høydahl :
>
> I plan to merge this to branch_8_5
>
>*SOLR-14359
>  Admin UI has "Select an
> option" for collections and cores drop-downs*
>
> Jan
>
> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 14:15 skrev jim ferenczi :
>
> +1, thanks Ignacio.
> I merged the fix for LUCENE-9300
>  and backported to
> the 8.5 branch.
>
> Le jeu. 2 avr. 2020 à 21:48, Adrien Grand  a
> écrit :
>
>> My general take on this is that it's ok to upgrade a dependency in a
>> patch release if the dependency upgrade itself is a new patch release of
>> the same minor version. The changelog of Tika 1.24 seems to include not
>> only bug fixes but also some enhancements[1], so I'd rather do a 8.6
>> release in the near future than backport this dependency upgrade to 8.5.
>>
>> [1] https://tika.apache.org/1.24/index.html
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:33 PM Cassandra Targett <
>> casstarg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Should we consider backporting SOLR-14367 (the most recent Tika
>>> upgrade)? It addresses a CVE in Tika, and while I think we usually avoid
>>> changing 3rd party component versions in patch releases, but maybe we
>>> should in this case? The upgrade also looks like it was pretty
>>> straightforward (drop-in replacement).
>>>
>>> Cassandra
>>> On Apr 2, 2020, 12:47 PM -0500, Ignacio Vera ,
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The
>>> main motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a
>>> serious bug that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via
>>> IW#addIndices.
>>>
>>> If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next
>>> week.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Ignacio
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Adrien
>>
>
>
>
>>>
>
> --
> Adrien
>


-- 
Adrien

Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Adrien Grand]

Solr doesn't use addIndexes(Directory) so this is not relevant to Solr
indeed.

On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:40 AM Ignacio Vera  wrote:

> I updated the Solr's release announcement so there is no changes. I think
> the Lucene's bug fix is not relevant for Solr.
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:23 AM Jan Høydahl 
> wrote:
>
>> If RC1 is released with a non-working SOLR-14359, then please change
>> Solr’s release announcement. Not sure whether the Lucene-bugfix is valid
>> for Solr users, in that case it can be highlighted instead?
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> 7. apr. 2020 kl. 10:13 skrev Ignacio Vera :
>>
>> Here are the drafts for the release notes, let me know if there is
>> something you wish to change:
>>
>> Lucene:
>>
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/resumedraft.action?draftId=148645634=e835ddb5-3bb9-4b33-b6ad-1770e0a95327=shareui=1586247034772
>>
>> Solr:
>>
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/resumedraft.action?draftId=148645636=c4a8eb5f-08d0-40db-a877-b94adb383061=shareui=1586247001694
>>
>> As I reminder I am planning to build the first RC tomorrow, Wednesday
>> April 8th.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:37 AM Ignacio Vera  wrote:
>>
>>>  Thanks Jan,  I see SOLR-14359
>>>  has already
>>> been back ported to branch 8.5, I am ok with  SOLR-14317
>>>  backporting as well.
>>> I am planning to build the first RC this coming Wednesday. Let me know if
>>> that works for you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 12:25 AM Jan Høydahl 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Also this coould be a backport candidate: SOLR-14317
  HttpClusterStateProvider
 throws exception when only one node down

 Jan

 3. apr. 2020 kl. 22:29 skrev Jan Høydahl :

 I plan to merge this to branch_8_5

*SOLR-14359
  Admin UI has "Select an
 option" for collections and cores drop-downs*

 Jan

 3. apr. 2020 kl. 14:15 skrev jim ferenczi :

 +1, thanks Ignacio.
 I merged the fix for LUCENE-9300
  and backported to
 the 8.5 branch.

 Le jeu. 2 avr. 2020 à 21:48, Adrien Grand  a écrit :

> My general take on this is that it's ok to upgrade a dependency in a
> patch release if the dependency upgrade itself is a new patch release of
> the same minor version. The changelog of Tika 1.24 seems to include not
> only bug fixes but also some enhancements[1], so I'd rather do a 8.6
> release in the near future than backport this dependency upgrade to 8.5.
>
> [1] https://tika.apache.org/1.24/index.html
>
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:33 PM Cassandra Targett <
> casstarg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Should we consider backporting SOLR-14367 (the most recent Tika
>> upgrade)? It addresses a CVE in Tika, and while I think we usually avoid
>> changing 3rd party component versions in patch releases, but maybe we
>> should in this case? The upgrade also looks like it was pretty
>> straightforward (drop-in replacement).
>>
>> Cassandra
>> On Apr 2, 2020, 12:47 PM -0500, Ignacio Vera ,
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The
>> main motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a
>> serious bug that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via
>> IW#addIndices.
>>
>> If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next
>> week.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Ignacio
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Adrien
>



>>

-- 
Adrien

Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Ignacio Vera]

I updated the Solr's release announcement so there is no changes. I think
the Lucene's bug fix is not relevant for Solr.

On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:23 AM Jan Høydahl  wrote:

> If RC1 is released with a non-working SOLR-14359, then please change
> Solr’s release announcement. Not sure whether the Lucene-bugfix is valid
> for Solr users, in that case it can be highlighted instead?
>
> Jan
>
> 7. apr. 2020 kl. 10:13 skrev Ignacio Vera :
>
> Here are the drafts for the release notes, let me know if there is
> something you wish to change:
>
> Lucene:
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/resumedraft.action?draftId=148645634=e835ddb5-3bb9-4b33-b6ad-1770e0a95327=shareui=1586247034772
>
> Solr:
>
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/resumedraft.action?draftId=148645636=c4a8eb5f-08d0-40db-a877-b94adb383061=shareui=1586247001694
>
> As I reminder I am planning to build the first RC tomorrow, Wednesday
> April 8th.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:37 AM Ignacio Vera  wrote:
>
>>  Thanks Jan,  I see SOLR-14359
>>  has already been back
>> ported to branch 8.5, I am ok with  SOLR-14317
>>  backporting as well.
>> I am planning to build the first RC this coming Wednesday. Let me know if
>> that works for you.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 12:25 AM Jan Høydahl 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Also this coould be a backport candidate: SOLR-14317
>>>  HttpClusterStateProvider
>>> throws exception when only one node down
>>>
>>> Jan
>>>
>>> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 22:29 skrev Jan Høydahl :
>>>
>>> I plan to merge this to branch_8_5
>>>
>>>*SOLR-14359  Admin
>>> UI has "Select an option" for collections and cores drop-downs*
>>>
>>> Jan
>>>
>>> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 14:15 skrev jim ferenczi :
>>>
>>> +1, thanks Ignacio.
>>> I merged the fix for LUCENE-9300
>>>  and backported to
>>> the 8.5 branch.
>>>
>>> Le jeu. 2 avr. 2020 à 21:48, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
>>>
 My general take on this is that it's ok to upgrade a dependency in a
 patch release if the dependency upgrade itself is a new patch release of
 the same minor version. The changelog of Tika 1.24 seems to include not
 only bug fixes but also some enhancements[1], so I'd rather do a 8.6
 release in the near future than backport this dependency upgrade to 8.5.

 [1] https://tika.apache.org/1.24/index.html

 On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:33 PM Cassandra Targett 
 wrote:

> Should we consider backporting SOLR-14367 (the most recent Tika
> upgrade)? It addresses a CVE in Tika, and while I think we usually avoid
> changing 3rd party component versions in patch releases, but maybe we
> should in this case? The upgrade also looks like it was pretty
> straightforward (drop-in replacement).
>
> Cassandra
> On Apr 2, 2020, 12:47 PM -0500, Ignacio Vera ,
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The main
> motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a serious
> bug that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via 
> IW#addIndices.
>
> If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next
> week.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ignacio
>
>
>
>

 --
 Adrien

>>>
>>>
>>>
>

Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Jan Høydahl]

If RC1 is released with a non-working SOLR-14359, then please change Solr’s 
release announcement. Not sure whether the Lucene-bugfix is valid for Solr 
users, in that case it can be highlighted instead?

Jan

> 7. apr. 2020 kl. 10:13 skrev Ignacio Vera :
> 
> Here are the drafts for the release notes, let me know if there is something 
> you wish to change:
> 
> Lucene:
> 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/resumedraft.action?draftId=148645634=e835ddb5-3bb9-4b33-b6ad-1770e0a95327=shareui=1586247034772
>  
> 
> 
> Solr:
> 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/resumedraft.action?draftId=148645636=c4a8eb5f-08d0-40db-a877-b94adb383061=shareui=1586247001694
>  
> 
> 
> As I reminder I am planning to build the first RC tomorrow, Wednesday April 
> 8th. 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:37 AM Ignacio Vera  > wrote:
>  Thanks Jan,  I see SOLR-14359 
>  has already been back 
> ported to branch 8.5, I am ok with  SOLR-14317 
>  backporting as well. I am 
> planning to build the first RC this coming Wednesday. Let me know if that 
> works for you.
> 
>  
> 
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 12:25 AM Jan Høydahl  > wrote:
> Also this coould be a backport candidate: SOLR-14317 
>  HttpClusterStateProvider 
> throws exception when only one node down
> 
> Jan
> 
>> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 22:29 skrev Jan Høydahl > >:
>> 
>> I plan to merge this to branch_8_5
>> 
>>SOLR-14359  Admin UI 
>> has "Select an option" for collections and cores drop-downs
>> 
>> Jan
>> 
>>> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 14:15 skrev jim ferenczi >> >:
>>> 
>>> +1, thanks Ignacio.
>>> I merged the fix for LUCENE-9300 
>>>  and backported to the 
>>> 8.5 branch.
>>> 
>>> Le jeu. 2 avr. 2020 à 21:48, Adrien Grand >> > a écrit :
>>> My general take on this is that it's ok to upgrade a dependency in a patch 
>>> release if the dependency upgrade itself is a new patch release of the same 
>>> minor version. The changelog of Tika 1.24 seems to include not only bug 
>>> fixes but also some enhancements[1], so I'd rather do a 8.6 release in the 
>>> near future than backport this dependency upgrade to 8.5.
>>> 
>>> [1] https://tika.apache.org/1.24/index.html 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:33 PM Cassandra Targett >> > wrote:
>>> Should we consider backporting SOLR-14367 (the most recent Tika upgrade)? 
>>> It addresses a CVE in Tika, and while I think we usually avoid changing 3rd 
>>> party component versions in patch releases, but maybe we should in this 
>>> case? The upgrade also looks like it was pretty straightforward (drop-in 
>>> replacement).
>>> 
>>> Cassandra
>>> On Apr 2, 2020, 12:47 PM -0500, Ignacio Vera >> >, wrote:
 Hi,
 
 I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The main 
 motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a serious 
 bug that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via 
 IW#addIndices.
 
 If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next week.
 
 Best regards,
 
 Ignacio
 
  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Adrien
>> 
> 

Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Ignacio Vera]

Here are the drafts for the release notes, let me know if there is
something you wish to change:

Lucene:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/resumedraft.action?draftId=148645634=e835ddb5-3bb9-4b33-b6ad-1770e0a95327=shareui=1586247034772

Solr:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/resumedraft.action?draftId=148645636=c4a8eb5f-08d0-40db-a877-b94adb383061=shareui=1586247001694

As I reminder I am planning to build the first RC tomorrow, Wednesday April
8th.



On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 8:37 AM Ignacio Vera  wrote:

>  Thanks Jan,  I see SOLR-14359
>  has already been back
> ported to branch 8.5, I am ok with  SOLR-14317
>  backporting as well. I
> am planning to build the first RC this coming Wednesday. Let me know if
> that works for you.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 12:25 AM Jan Høydahl  wrote:
>
>> Also this coould be a backport candidate: SOLR-14317
>>  HttpClusterStateProvider
>> throws exception when only one node down
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 22:29 skrev Jan Høydahl :
>>
>> I plan to merge this to branch_8_5
>>
>>*SOLR-14359  Admin
>> UI has "Select an option" for collections and cores drop-downs*
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 14:15 skrev jim ferenczi :
>>
>> +1, thanks Ignacio.
>> I merged the fix for LUCENE-9300
>>  and backported to
>> the 8.5 branch.
>>
>> Le jeu. 2 avr. 2020 à 21:48, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
>>
>>> My general take on this is that it's ok to upgrade a dependency in a
>>> patch release if the dependency upgrade itself is a new patch release of
>>> the same minor version. The changelog of Tika 1.24 seems to include not
>>> only bug fixes but also some enhancements[1], so I'd rather do a 8.6
>>> release in the near future than backport this dependency upgrade to 8.5.
>>>
>>> [1] https://tika.apache.org/1.24/index.html
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:33 PM Cassandra Targett 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Should we consider backporting SOLR-14367 (the most recent Tika
 upgrade)? It addresses a CVE in Tika, and while I think we usually avoid
 changing 3rd party component versions in patch releases, but maybe we
 should in this case? The upgrade also looks like it was pretty
 straightforward (drop-in replacement).

 Cassandra
 On Apr 2, 2020, 12:47 PM -0500, Ignacio Vera ,
 wrote:

 Hi,

 I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The main
 motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a serious
 bug that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via 
 IW#addIndices.

 If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next week.

 Best regards,

 Ignacio




>>>
>>> --
>>> Adrien
>>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Ignacio Vera]

 Thanks Jan,  I see SOLR-14359
 has already been back
ported to branch 8.5, I am ok with  SOLR-14317
 backporting as well. I
am planning to build the first RC this coming Wednesday. Let me know if
that works for you.



On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 12:25 AM Jan Høydahl  wrote:

> Also this coould be a backport candidate: SOLR-14317
>  HttpClusterStateProvider
> throws exception when only one node down
>
> Jan
>
> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 22:29 skrev Jan Høydahl :
>
> I plan to merge this to branch_8_5
>
>*SOLR-14359  Admin
> UI has "Select an option" for collections and cores drop-downs*
>
> Jan
>
> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 14:15 skrev jim ferenczi :
>
> +1, thanks Ignacio.
> I merged the fix for LUCENE-9300
>  and backported to the
> 8.5 branch.
>
> Le jeu. 2 avr. 2020 à 21:48, Adrien Grand  a écrit :
>
>> My general take on this is that it's ok to upgrade a dependency in a
>> patch release if the dependency upgrade itself is a new patch release of
>> the same minor version. The changelog of Tika 1.24 seems to include not
>> only bug fixes but also some enhancements[1], so I'd rather do a 8.6
>> release in the near future than backport this dependency upgrade to 8.5.
>>
>> [1] https://tika.apache.org/1.24/index.html
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:33 PM Cassandra Targett 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Should we consider backporting SOLR-14367 (the most recent Tika
>>> upgrade)? It addresses a CVE in Tika, and while I think we usually avoid
>>> changing 3rd party component versions in patch releases, but maybe we
>>> should in this case? The upgrade also looks like it was pretty
>>> straightforward (drop-in replacement).
>>>
>>> Cassandra
>>> On Apr 2, 2020, 12:47 PM -0500, Ignacio Vera , wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The main
>>> motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a serious
>>> bug that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via IW#addIndices.
>>>
>>> If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next week.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Ignacio
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Adrien
>>
>
>
>

Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Jan Høydahl]

Also this coould be a backport candidate: SOLR-14317 
 HttpClusterStateProvider 
throws exception when only one node down

Jan

> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 22:29 skrev Jan Høydahl :
> 
> I plan to merge this to branch_8_5
> 
>SOLR-14359  Admin UI has 
> "Select an option" for collections and cores drop-downs
> 
> Jan
> 
>> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 14:15 skrev jim ferenczi > >:
>> 
>> +1, thanks Ignacio.
>> I merged the fix for LUCENE-9300 
>>  and backported to the 
>> 8.5 branch.
>> 
>> Le jeu. 2 avr. 2020 à 21:48, Adrien Grand > > a écrit :
>> My general take on this is that it's ok to upgrade a dependency in a patch 
>> release if the dependency upgrade itself is a new patch release of the same 
>> minor version. The changelog of Tika 1.24 seems to include not only bug 
>> fixes but also some enhancements[1], so I'd rather do a 8.6 release in the 
>> near future than backport this dependency upgrade to 8.5.
>> 
>> [1] https://tika.apache.org/1.24/index.html 
>> 
>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:33 PM Cassandra Targett > > wrote:
>> Should we consider backporting SOLR-14367 (the most recent Tika upgrade)? It 
>> addresses a CVE in Tika, and while I think we usually avoid changing 3rd 
>> party component versions in patch releases, but maybe we should in this 
>> case? The upgrade also looks like it was pretty straightforward (drop-in 
>> replacement).
>> 
>> Cassandra
>> On Apr 2, 2020, 12:47 PM -0500, Ignacio Vera > >, wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The main 
>>> motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a serious 
>>> bug that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via IW#addIndices.
>>> 
>>> If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next week.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Ignacio
>>> 
>>>  
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Adrien
> 

Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Jan Høydahl]

I plan to merge this to branch_8_5

   SOLR-14359  Admin UI has 
"Select an option" for collections and cores drop-downs

Jan

> 3. apr. 2020 kl. 14:15 skrev jim ferenczi :
> 
> +1, thanks Ignacio.
> I merged the fix for LUCENE-9300 
>  and backported to the 8.5 
> branch.
> 
> Le jeu. 2 avr. 2020 à 21:48, Adrien Grand  > a écrit :
> My general take on this is that it's ok to upgrade a dependency in a patch 
> release if the dependency upgrade itself is a new patch release of the same 
> minor version. The changelog of Tika 1.24 seems to include not only bug fixes 
> but also some enhancements[1], so I'd rather do a 8.6 release in the near 
> future than backport this dependency upgrade to 8.5.
> 
> [1] https://tika.apache.org/1.24/index.html 
> 
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:33 PM Cassandra Targett  > wrote:
> Should we consider backporting SOLR-14367 (the most recent Tika upgrade)? It 
> addresses a CVE in Tika, and while I think we usually avoid changing 3rd 
> party component versions in patch releases, but maybe we should in this case? 
> The upgrade also looks like it was pretty straightforward (drop-in 
> replacement).
> 
> Cassandra
> On Apr 2, 2020, 12:47 PM -0500, Ignacio Vera  >, wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The main 
>> motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a serious bug 
>> that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via IW#addIndices.
>> 
>> If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next week.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> Ignacio
>> 
>>  
> 
> 
> -- 
> Adrien

Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[jim ferenczi]

+1, thanks Ignacio.
I merged the fix for LUCENE-9300
 and backported to the
8.5 branch.

Le jeu. 2 avr. 2020 à 21:48, Adrien Grand  a écrit :

> My general take on this is that it's ok to upgrade a dependency in a patch
> release if the dependency upgrade itself is a new patch release of the same
> minor version. The changelog of Tika 1.24 seems to include not only bug
> fixes but also some enhancements[1], so I'd rather do a 8.6 release in the
> near future than backport this dependency upgrade to 8.5.
>
> [1] https://tika.apache.org/1.24/index.html
>
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:33 PM Cassandra Targett 
> wrote:
>
>> Should we consider backporting SOLR-14367 (the most recent Tika upgrade)?
>> It addresses a CVE in Tika, and while I think we usually avoid changing 3rd
>> party component versions in patch releases, but maybe we should in this
>> case? The upgrade also looks like it was pretty straightforward (drop-in
>> replacement).
>>
>> Cassandra
>> On Apr 2, 2020, 12:47 PM -0500, Ignacio Vera , wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The main
>> motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a serious
>> bug that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via IW#addIndices.
>>
>> If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next week.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Ignacio
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Adrien
>

Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Adrien Grand]

My general take on this is that it's ok to upgrade a dependency in a patch
release if the dependency upgrade itself is a new patch release of the same
minor version. The changelog of Tika 1.24 seems to include not only bug
fixes but also some enhancements[1], so I'd rather do a 8.6 release in the
near future than backport this dependency upgrade to 8.5.

[1] https://tika.apache.org/1.24/index.html

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 9:33 PM Cassandra Targett 
wrote:

> Should we consider backporting SOLR-14367 (the most recent Tika upgrade)?
> It addresses a CVE in Tika, and while I think we usually avoid changing 3rd
> party component versions in patch releases, but maybe we should in this
> case? The upgrade also looks like it was pretty straightforward (drop-in
> replacement).
>
> Cassandra
> On Apr 2, 2020, 12:47 PM -0500, Ignacio Vera , wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The main
> motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a serious
> bug that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via IW#addIndices.
>
> If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next week.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ignacio
>
>
>
>

-- 
Adrien

Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Cassandra Targett]

Should we consider backporting SOLR-14367 (the most recent Tika upgrade)? It 
addresses a CVE in Tika, and while I think we usually avoid changing 3rd party 
component versions in patch releases, but maybe we should in this case? The 
upgrade also looks like it was pretty straightforward (drop-in replacement).

Cassandra
On Apr 2, 2020, 12:47 PM -0500, Ignacio Vera , wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The main 
> motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a serious bug 
> that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via IW#addIndices.
>
> If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next week.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ignacio
>
>

Re: Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Adrien Grand]

+1

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 7:47 PM Ignacio Vera  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The main
> motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a serious
> bug that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via IW#addIndices.
>
> If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next week.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ignacio
>
>
>


-- 
Adrien

Lucene/Solr 8.5.1 bugfix release

[Ignacio Vera]

Hi,

I propose a quick 8.5.1 bugfix release and I volunteer as RM. The main
motivation for this release is LUCENE-9300 where Jim addressed a serious
bug that can lead to data corruption when merging indices via IW#addIndices.

If there are no objections I am planning to create a RC early next week.

Best regards,

Ignacio