Regarding CASSANDRA-12620, it has been committed in the 3.0 branch at
c612cd8d7dbd24888c216ad53f974686b88dd601 and merged into 3.11. As, if I am
not mistaken, 3.11 should become the new 3.10 release, I do not think that
there is a problem.
Did I miss something Ariel?
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:45
+1
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko
wrote:
> That’s a good point.
>
> So 3.11 after 3.10, then move on to 3.11.x further bug fix releases?
>
> +1 to that.
>
> --
> AY
>
> On 10 January 2017 at 17:22:09, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org)
> wrote:
>
> I had the same though
>
> So 3.11 after 3.10, then move on to 3.11.x further bug fix releases?
>
+1
+1
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko
wrote:
> That’s a good point.
>
> So 3.11 after 3.10, then move on to 3.11.x further bug fix releases?
>
> +1 to that.
>
> --
> AY
>
> On 10 January 2017 at 17:22:09, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org)
> wrote:
>
> I had the same though
> So 3.11 after 3.10, then move on to 3.11.x further bug fix releases?
+1
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote:
> That’s a good point.
>
> So 3.11 after 3.10, then move on to 3.11.x further bug fix releases?
>
> +1 to that.
>
> --
> AY
>
> On 10 January 2017 at 17:22:09, Mich
That’s a good point.
So 3.11 after 3.10, then move on to 3.11.x further bug fix releases?
+1 to that.
--
AY
On 10 January 2017 at 17:22:09, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) wrote:
I had the same thought. 3.10 is the tick, so a 3.11 bugfix tock follows
the intended final fix release f
I had the same thought. 3.10 is the tick, so a 3.11 bugfix tock follows
the intended final fix release for closing out tick-tock. Throwing a
3.10.1 out there would add more user confusion and would be the exact
same contents as a 3.11 release versioned package set anyway.
--
Michael
On 01/10/201
> Seems like we'd just release that as 3.10.1 (instead of 3.11) and just
> tell people "you can upgrade to 4.0 w/latest version of 3.10". This
> does violate the "even releases features, odd releases bugfix", so
> maybe a 3.11 as final 3.X line would help keep that consistent?
This feels like a de
| If someone tries to upgrade 3.10 to whatever 4.0 ends up being I
think they will hit the wrong answer bug. So I would advocate for
having the fix brought
into 3.10, but it was broken in 3.9 as well.
Seems like we'd just release that as 3.10.1 (instead of 3.11) and just
tell people "you can upgra
Hi,
The upgrade tests are tricky because they upgrade from an existing
release to a current release. The bug is in 3.9 and won't be fixed until
3.11 because the test checks out and builds 3.9 right now. 3.10 doesn't
include the commit that fixes the issue so it will fail after 3.10 is
released
I would personally favour pushing 3.10 out without waiting for the pretty
innocent
#13113 resolution.
With the amount of bug fixes accumulated in the 3.X branch it’s borderline
irresponsible to not release them out to the users.
--
AY
On 10 January 2017 at 17:05:57, Michael Shuler (mich...@pba
Generally, fixver has only been set during commits - I only marked 3.10
and blocker status to highlight the few that failed votes, in order to
sort of cheerlead "fix me so we can release!" JIRA tickets. The full
test-failure list is probably the more "realistic" view, since any of
those may occur.
Latest cassandra-3.11_dtest run failed on one test,
system_auth_ks_is_alterable_test:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13113
The dtest variations (novnode, offheap, upgrade, large) have other
failures, but if the green light for release is unit tests and the
default dtest, we're cl
I assume you meant the query w/out 12617 embedded?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20CASSANDRA%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%203.10%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved
Do we have confidence that all test failures have fixVersion attached
correctly? The list of test failures w
>
> I concede it would be fine to do it gradually. Once the pace of issues
> introduced by new development is beaten by the pace at which they are
> addressed I think things will go well.
So from Michael's JIRA query:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12617?jql=project%20%3D%20CASSAN
Hi,
I concede it would be fine to do it gradually. Once the pace of issues
introduced by new development is beaten by the pace at which they are
addressed I think things will go well.
Ariel
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017, at 11:17 AM, Josh McKenzie wrote:
> @ariel: you're letting the perfect be the enemy
If they aren’t regressions from 3.9, we should still push 3.10 out.
The branch has accumulated a lot of fixes, for problems that *are* real.
Just have a look at CHANGES.txt.
By holding 3.10 you are denying those (arguably few, but still) users fixes for
bugs that we
know are in.
It’s been more
@ariel: you're letting the perfect be the enemy of the good here. We (as a
project) have been releasing with a smattering of test failures and upgrade
edge-cases back into perpetuity. While that doesn't make it ideal or
justify continuing the behavior, getting a green testall + dtest for 3.10
is a
Hi,
At least some of those failures are real. I don't think we should
release 3.10 until the real failures are addressed. As I said earlier
one of them is a wrong answer bug that is not going to be fixed in 3.10.
Can we just ignore failures because we think they don't mean anything?
Who is going
I think we should start with blocking 3.10 releases on testall + Dtest.
After 3.10, we can start blocking it on other jobs for each release after
that. This will make sure we make progress and dont cause 3.10 to sit for a
long time. Thoughts?
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:13 AM, Josh McKenzie wrote:
First, I think we need to clarify if we're blocking on just testall + dtest
or blocking on *all test jobs*.
If the latter, upgrade tests are the elephant in the room:
http://cassci.datastax.com/view/cassandra-3.11/job/cassandra-3.11_dtest_upgrade/lastCompletedBuild/testReport/
Do we have confiden
I'm not sure I understand the culmination of the past couple of threads on this.
With a situation like:
http://cassci.datastax.com/view/cassandra-3.11/job/cassandra-3.11_dtest/lastCompletedBuild/testReport/
We have some sense of stability on what might be flaky tests(?).
Again, I'm not sure what
22 matches
Mail list logo
