Re: quarterly board report: what should we add?

2020-02-11 Thread Owen Nichols
Karen, thank you for putting this together. A few things that caught my eye: - The mission description seem unnecessarily convoluted. Surely there is a more succinct way to word this. - The text "The Committer-to-PMC ratio is roughly 7:4” seems to appear in a great many board reports, despite

quarterly board report: what should we add?

2020-02-11 Thread Karen Miller
Geode Developers, Here's the start of a board report that is due tomorrow (Feb 12). I feel that the Project Activity or Community Health section could use more information about what we're working on. There are so many developers working on so many exciting areas that I'm not sure which we all

Re: Include GEODE-7776 in release 1.12

2020-02-11 Thread Jinmei Liao
+1 On Tue, Feb 11, 2020, 11:39 AM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote: > +1 > > On 2/11/20 11:23 AM, Dick Cavender wrote: > > This regression was introduced when the geode-gfsh subproject was > recently > > added. While not obvious this created a critical build / runtime cycle > > between geode-core and

Re: Include GEODE-7776 in release 1.12

2020-02-11 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
+1 On 2/11/20 11:23 AM, Dick Cavender wrote: This regression was introduced when the geode-gfsh subproject was recently added. While not obvious this created a critical build / runtime cycle between geode-core and geode-gfsh that causes some tools/IDEs, that don't cope well with circular

Re: Include GEODE-7776 in release 1.12

2020-02-11 Thread Owen Nichols
+1 for bringing this critical fix to 1.12 > On Feb 11, 2020, at 11:23 AM, Dick Cavender wrote: > > This regression was introduced when the geode-gfsh subproject was recently > added. While not obvious this created a critical build / runtime cycle > between geode-core and geode-gfsh that causes

Include GEODE-7776 in release 1.12

2020-02-11 Thread Dick Cavender
This regression was introduced when the geode-gfsh subproject was recently added. While not obvious this created a critical build / runtime cycle between geode-core and geode-gfsh that causes some tools/IDEs, that don't cope well with circular dependencies, to fail. Additionally no previous Geode

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bumping dependency versions for 1.12

2020-02-11 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
Nothing critical. This can be pushed to 1.13. --Udo On 2/11/20 9:44 AM, Owen Nichols wrote: Bumping dependencies is something we normally start just after a release, to allow ample time to shake out any unforeseen side-effects. Is the change you are proposing already on develop? Is there a

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bumping dependency versions for 1.12

2020-02-11 Thread Owen Nichols
Bumping dependencies is something we normally start just after a release, to allow ample time to shake out any unforeseen side-effects. Is the change you are proposing already on develop? Is there a fix in Spring 5.2.3 that is critical to bring? On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 9:14 AM Patrick Johnson

Re: [DISCUSSION] Bumping dependency versions for 1.12

2020-02-11 Thread Patrick Johnson
+1 On 2/11/20, 8:42 AM, "Udo Kohlmeyer" wrote: Hi there, I wonder if this might be a little late in the game, but would we consider bumping some of the dependency versions for 1.12? Off the top of my head, Spring from 5.2.1 to 5.2.3 --Udo

[DISCUSSION] Bumping dependency versions for 1.12

2020-02-11 Thread Udo Kohlmeyer
Hi there, I wonder if this might be a little late in the game, but would we consider bumping some of the dependency versions for 1.12? Off the top of my head, Spring from 5.2.1 to 5.2.3 --Udo