Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

rojects > >> should distribute releases via the mirroring system, not via the > >> archives. Once they stop promoting the artifacts on their downloads > >> page, the artifacts should be removed (archived) from > >> SVN/dist.apache.org as the same time. > >&g

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

he.org as the same time. >> >> If you're uncomfortable with interpreting "development" to include the >> release promotion period where they are linked on the downloads page, >> you could instead just choose to not "cease" development until you are

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

include the > release promotion period where they are linked on the downloads page, > you could instead just choose to not "cease" development until you are > ready to remove it from the downloads page. You could slow development > down to the point where maybe you might still

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

#x27;t "ceased". But, what you should not do, is continue promoting the artifact on the downloads page with a link to the archives. If somebody from INFRA wants to contradict me on this... I'm happy to be corrected with more accurate information... but I'm 99% confident t

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 1:14 PM Christopher wrote: > On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 12:20 PM Patrick Hunt wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 8:15 AM Andor Molnar wrote: > > > > > Alright. Not sure how to coordinate this properly, let’s try to discuss > > > these 3 points individually. > > > > > > 1)

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

I think maintaining and storing releases are two different things. We don’t want to maintain 3 release lines that’s why we want to announce 3.4 EoL. Apache asked us to host only the latest releases on ‘downloads’ server and move everything else to ‘archive’. I don’t bother making them available

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

Well, for a long time we only had 1 line maintained, 3.4 basically. It is just right now we have 3 lines, which is I think one too many. (Plus we also have master to maintain additional to the active release lines, that's 4 active branches. Well, more or less, 3.4 is pretty inactive already). I pr

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 12:20 PM Patrick Hunt wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 8:15 AM Andor Molnar wrote: > > > Alright. Not sure how to coordinate this properly, let’s try to discuss > > these 3 points individually. > > > > 1) EOL is 1st of June, 2020 which means from this day forward 3.4 is ..

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 8:15 AM Andor Molnar wrote: > Alright. Not sure how to coordinate this properly, let’s try to discuss > these 3 points individually. > > 1) EOL is 1st of June, 2020 which means from this day forward 3.4 is ... >- not supported by the community dev team, >- not accep

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

Alright. Not sure how to coordinate this properly, let’s try to discuss these 3 points individually. 1) EOL is 1st of June, 2020 which means from this day forward 3.4 is ... - not supported by the community dev team, - not accepting patches, no future releases, no security fixes, - late

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

+1 FYI - the next release of Curator will drop 3.4.x support. -Jordan > On Apr 1, 2020, at 11:30 PM, Michael Han wrote: > > +1. > > For EOL policy statement, just to throw something out here that i can think > of: > > * Define what EOL means (such as: not supported by community dev team > any

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

+1. For EOL policy statement, just to throw something out here that i can think of: * Define what EOL means (such as: not supported by community dev team anymore, no future 3.4 releases .. still accessible at download page for X years..) and a date of EOL. * Provide guidelines for upgrading path

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

+1 (non-binding) On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 5:04 AM Andor Molnar wrote: > > Hi folks, > > Based on Enrico’s latest post about a 3.4 client problem I’d like to push > this initiative. > Asking more senior members of the community what communicated policy is > needed exactly to say 3.4 is EoL? > > In

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

Hi folks, Based on Enrico’s latest post about a 3.4 client problem I’d like to push this initiative. Asking more senior members of the community what communicated policy is needed exactly to say 3.4 is EoL? In terms of timing I’d like Patrick’s suggestion about 1st of June, 2020. Any objectio

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

I think it would be useful for an EOL statement about 3.4.x to include a policy on interoperability of newer ZooKeeper servers with 3.4.x client code. Stacks that build on top of Kafka and Hadoop (I'm looking at you, Spark) often wind up having an indirect dependency on a comically stale ZooKeeper

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 9:28 AM Enrico Olivelli wrote: > Il giorno mer 4 mar 2020 alle ore 17:23 Patrick Hunt > ha scritto: > > > > It seems like we should have a stated/communicated policy around release > > lifecycles before sending an EOL message. That way folks have some runway > > to plan fo

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

Il giorno mer 4 mar 2020 alle ore 17:23 Patrick Hunt ha scritto: > > It seems like we should have a stated/communicated policy around release > lifecycles before sending an EOL message. That way folks have some runway > to plan for the event, both near term (3.4) as well as long term. Shall we se

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

It seems like we should have a stated/communicated policy around release lifecycles before sending an EOL message. That way folks have some runway to plan for the event, both near term (3.4) as well as long term. Patrick On Wed, Mar 4, 2020 at 5:16 AM Szalay-Bekő Máté wrote: > Also a minor thin

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

Also a minor thing to consider: we wanted to ask the HBase community to upgrade to ZooKeeper 3.5 before, and the conclusion there was that they will do so only when the EOL will be at least scheduled / announced on the ZooKeeper 3.4 versions. Maybe there are other ZooKeeper users as well who will n

Re: [DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

I'm +1 on this. We're planning to drop support for 3.4.x in the next release of Apache Curator, FYI. -Jordan > On Mar 4, 2020, at 7:36 AM, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > > Hi, > we are releasing 3.6.0 (I am waiting for mirrors to sync before > updating the website). > > In my opinion it is time to

[DISCUSS] Sending 3.4 release line to End-Of-Life status

Hi, we are releasing 3.6.0 (I am waiting for mirrors to sync before updating the website). In my opinion it is time to officially send 3.4 branch to EOL status, that is: - we are not expecting new releases - drop 3.4 from download area (it will stay on archives as usual) - strongly encourage peopl

[jira] [Resolved] (ZOOKEEPER-2710) Regenerate documentation for branch-3.4 release

committed to {{branch-3.4}} Branch 3.4: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=zookeeper.git;a=commit;h=09555983be93e5278b1ab8a71e3ca9f54ea6c374 > Regenerate documentation for branch-3.4 release > --- > > Key: ZO

[jira] [Updated] (ZOOKEEPER-2710) Regenerate documentation for branch-3.4 release

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2710?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Rakesh R updated ZOOKEEPER-2710: Component/s: documentation > Regenerate documentation for branch-3.4 rele

[jira] [Created] (ZOOKEEPER-2710) Regenerate documentation for branch-3.4 release

Rakesh R created ZOOKEEPER-2710: --- Summary: Regenerate documentation for branch-3.4 release Key: ZOOKEEPER-2710 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2710 Project: ZooKeeper

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

That sounds good to me. I'm planning to do RC0 testing over the next few days. Patrick On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Mahadev Konar wrote: > Pat, >  I think we should continue to beat on RC0. I'd like to cut  a new > release candidate after the weekend. That will give everyone some > weekend t

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

Pat, I think we should continue to beat on RC0. I'd like to cut a new release candidate after the weekend. That will give everyone some weekend time to play with it. I'll aim for a new RC on Monday/Tuesday. Seems reasonable? thanks mahadev On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote:

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

I won't reasonably have time to review the patch and test the RC0 at scale until thursday/friday/weekend. Mahadev what do you want to do - should we continue to beat on RC0 and you cut a second release candidate over the weekend? Or are you planning to cut a new RC (after fix(es) go in) on Monday?

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

Thanks a lot Camille. mahadev On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Camille Fournier wrote: > I have a fix and a test that shows the error. Will get a patch together soon. > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Camille Fournier wrote: >> I'm happy to take a look at this and post progress. I'm in a ho

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

I have a fix and a test that shows the error. Will get a patch together soon. On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Camille Fournier wrote: > I'm happy to take a look at this and post progress. I'm in a hospital > waiting for a baby to be born so I will be on and off but I'll post > what I get through

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

I'm happy to take a look at this and post progress. I'm in a hospital waiting for a baby to be born so I will be on and off but I'll post what I get through. C On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Mahadev Konar wrote: > I think mockito should be useful here. Our code needs to be a little > cleaner t

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

I think mockito should be useful here. Our code needs to be a little cleaner to be able to test these with "real" unit tests :). thanks mahadev On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Patrick Hunt wrote: > Do we have a test that exercises this code path? Any commit we should > really include something

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

Do we have a test that exercises this code path? Any commit we should really include something that verifies the change. On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Mahadev Konar wrote: > Thomas, > Any chance, you could make the change just on 3.4 branch without the > Enum changes and others? > > thanks >

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

Thomas, Any chance, you could make the change just on 3.4 branch without the Enum changes and others? thanks mahadev On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Thomas Koch wrote: > Ted Dunning: >> I would love to.  My travel schedule just now is pretty heinous so I don't >> know when I will get to it. >

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

Ted Dunning: > I would love to. My travel schedule just now is pretty heinous so I don't > know when I will get to it. This is how I (hopefully) fixed this: https://github.com/thkoch2001/zookeeper/blob/proposed_patches/src/java/main/org/apache/zookeeper/server/PrepRequestProcessor.java#L525 Howev

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

I would love to. My travel schedule just now is pretty heinous so I don't know when I will get to it. On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Mahadev Konar wrote: > Ted, > Would you mind uploading a quick fix for the issue? > > thanks > mahadev > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Ted Dunning > wrote

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

Adding Marshall. thanks mahadev On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Mahadev Konar wrote: > Ted, >  Would you mind uploading a quick fix for the issue? > > thanks > mahadev > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: >> The switch issue that was discussed earlier definitely looks wrong.

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

Ted, Would you mind uploading a quick fix for the issue? thanks mahadev On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: > The switch issue that was discussed earlier definitely looks wrong. > I haven't had time to look at the newer stuff. > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Patrick Hunt w

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

The switch issue that was discussed earlier definitely looks wrong. I haven't had time to look at the newer stuff. On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Patrick Hunt wrote: > No worries, we don't shoot messengers we club them. ;-) > > It certainly looks like a serious issue (hygiene issues aside). >

Re: ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

No worries, we don't shoot messengers we club them. ;-) It certainly looks like a serious issue (hygiene issues aside). Ted/Mahadev what do you think? Patrick On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 3:08 AM, Thomas Koch wrote: > Hi, > > please don't shot the messenger. > I found what I consider to be a critic

ZK-1246 blocker for 3.4 release?

Hi, please don't shot the messenger. I found what I consider to be a critical regression in the multi transaction issue (ZK-965). Marshalling errors may not be handled correctly since then. Please see ZOOKEEPER-1246 for details. Regards, Thomas Koch, http://www.koch.ro

Re: 3.4 release

Thanks Camille, You beat me to it. I think we can kick off a release candidate this week. Ill send out an update by tonight. Also, *committers *please note that there are 41 patch availables in the jira. The reason I cut out a 3.4 branch early was so that we do not hold up patches in the queue.

3.4 release

Let's get this baby out the door guys, this release has been lingering for a long time. On the list of blockers: I have moved https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1159 from a blocker for 3.4 to 3.5, since we never found a reproducible test for the code or a reason for the reported bug

Re: 3.4 Release.

On 08/05/2011 04:41 PM, Vishal Kher wrote: Sorry, I meant to say 1144 instead of 1145 in my earlier mail :-) I will fix 1144. Eugene, you can leave 1145 assigned to me for now. If 1144 doesn't resolve it, I will assign it back to you :-) Thanks, sounds fine, Vishal, feel free to assign back to

Re: 3.4 Release.

Sorry, I meant to say 1144 instead of 1145 in my earlier mail :-) I will fix 1144. Eugene, you can leave 1145 assigned to me for now. If 1144 doesn't resolve it, I will assign it back to you :-) On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Eugene Koontz wrote: > On 8/5/11 4:03 PM, Vishal Kher wrote: > >> Th

Re: 3.4 Release.

On 8/5/11 4:03 PM, Vishal Kher wrote: Thanks, Camille. I am pretty sure that the bug that Eugene is seeing is because of 1145 as well. In the interest of time, I wanted to make sure that I wasn't doing the same changes that Eugene was working on. I will fix 1145 since I had spent some time debu

Re: 3.4 Release.

guys in the loop. > > C > > -Original Message- > From: Eugene Koontz [mailto:ekoo...@hiro-tan.org] > Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 2:02 PM > To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org > Subject: Re: 3.4 Release. > > On 8/4/11 4:48 PM, Vishal Kher wrote: > > Is your fix for 1

Re: 3.4 Release.

Koontz [mailto:ekoo...@hiro-tan.org] > Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 2:02 PM > To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org > Subject: Re: 3.4 Release. > > On 8/4/11 4:48 PM, Vishal Kher wrote: > > Is your fix for 1145 also going to fix 1144 (are you fixing the Leader)? > > > Hi Vishal,

Re: 3.4 Release.

On 08/05/2011 11:47 AM, Fournier, Camille F. wrote: I might have time this weekend to look at some of this. If I do, I will keep you guys in the loop. C Thanks Camille, Much appreciated. -Eugene

RE: 3.4 Release.

I might have time this weekend to look at some of this. If I do, I will keep you guys in the loop. C -Original Message- From: Eugene Koontz [mailto:ekoo...@hiro-tan.org] Sent: Friday, August 05, 2011 2:02 PM To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org Subject: Re: 3.4 Release. On 8/4/11 4:48 PM

Re: 3.4 Release.

On 8/4/11 4:48 PM, Vishal Kher wrote: Is your fix for 1145 also going to fix 1144 (are you fixing the Leader)? Hi Vishal, I'm not at all sure yet..will update the 1145 when I have a chance to look at it next week. -Eugene

Re: 3.4 Release.

Hi Eugene, On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Eugene Koontz wrote: > On 08/03/2011 07:23 PM, Mahadev Konar wrote: > >> Thanks Vishal and Eugene. >> >> I am still waiting on the jenkins builds. Are you guys planning to work on >> ZOOKEEPER-1144

Re: 3.4 Release.

On 08/03/2011 07:23 PM, Mahadev Konar wrote: Thanks Vishal and Eugene. I am still waiting on the jenkins builds. Are you guys planning to work on ZOOKEEPER-1144/1145? thanks mahadev Sure, I'll assign ZOOKEEPER-1145 to myself. -Eugene

Re: 3.4 Release.

Thanks Vishal and Eugene. I am still waiting on the jenkins builds. Are you guys planning to work on ZOOKEEPER-1144 /1145? thanks mahadev On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Eugene Koontz wrote: > On 08/03/2011 09:32 AM, Patrick Hunt wrote: > >

Re: 3.4 Release.

On 08/03/2011 09:32 AM, Patrick Hunt wrote: Please file a bug on this. Blocker for 3.4.0. Hi Patrick, Filed the bug here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1145 Can you try re-running your test, but modify it to attempt to have a client connect to a non-observer in the case th

Re: 3.4 Release.

I found one problem - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1144 I am not sure if this is causing Euguene's test to fail as well. On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: > Seems the observer (or the quorum itself) is failing to allow a client > to connect: > > [junit] 2011

Re: 3.4 Release.

Seems the observer (or the quorum itself) is failing to allow a client to connect: [junit] 2011-08-03 14:12:29,273 [myid:3] - INFO [QuorumPeer[myid=3]/0:0:0:0:0:0:0:0:11229:QuorumPeer@701] - OBSERVING [junit] 2011-08-03 14:12:29,359 [myid:] - INFO [main:ZooKeeper@427] - Initiating client

Re: 3.4 Release.

On 8/2/11 10:32 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: What type of ec2 instance are you running on? I've seen some failures due to underpowered/underresourced systems. Is ObserverTest consistently failing? Patrick Hi Patrick, It's an m1.large. I have ulimit -a set so that open files and open processes

Re: 3.4 Release.

What type of ec2 instance are you running on? I've seen some failures due to underpowered/underresourced systems. Is ObserverTest consistently failing? Patrick On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Eugene Koontz wrote: > On 8/2/11 5:26 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: >> >> Eugene you saw my email about that

Re: 3.4 Release.

On 8/2/11 5:26 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: Eugene you saw my email about that test and ulimit right? Make sure you have ulimit for max files and max processes> 1k, that was the issue I had (max proc was set to 1024). Patrick Thank you Patrick, no; I missed your earlier email about max processes.

Re: 3.4 Release.

Eugene you saw my email about that test and ulimit right? Make sure you have ulimit for max files and max processes > 1k, that was the issue I had (max proc was set to 1024). Patrick On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Eugene Koontz wrote: > On 8/1/11 7:49 PM, Mahadev Konar wrote: >> >> Looks like j

Re: 3.4 Release.

On 8/1/11 7:49 PM, Mahadev Konar wrote: Looks like jenkins is still having issues. Until then we can fix the Open issues we have: ZOOKEEPER-1125: Intermittent java core test failures Vishal do you want to take this up? ZOOKEEPER-839: Ill upload a patch by tonight. ZOOKEEPER-1136. Ben would you

RE: 3.4 Release.

7;t seem to fix the issue on my local machine reliably, so there's more than that. C -Original Message- From: Vishal Kher [mailto:vishalm...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 10:49 AM To: Mahadev Konar Cc: dev@zookeeper.apache.org; Eugene Koontz; Benjamin Reed Subject: Re: 3.4 R

Re: 3.4 Release.

;> > wrote: >> >> Thanks a ton Vishal! >> >> >> >> mahadev >> >> >> >> On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Vishal Kher wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hi Mahadev, >> >>> >> >>> ZOOKEEPER-1006 is fi

Re: 3.4 Release.

onar > wrote: > >> Thanks a ton Vishal! > >> > >> mahadev > >> > >> On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Vishal Kher wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Mahadev, > >>> > >>> ZOOKEEPER-1006 is fixed. > >>> ZOOKEEPER-10

RE: 3.4 Release.

o 3.4 ZOOKEEPER-1140 : Sure. I will work on this. -Original Message- From: Mahadev Konar [mailto:maha...@hortonworks.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 11:51 AM To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org Subject: Re: 3.4 Release. Hi Laxman, The patches look good but I think we need to be caref

Re: 3.4 Release.

Hi Laxman, The patches look good but I think we need to be careful on checkin in patches for the 3.4 release. We havent had a release for a long time and I'd prefer for anything (not a blocker and non critical features) to go into 3.5. I am hopeful (if the jenkins servers are up) of cutt

RE: 3.4 Release.

lp of Flavio. -Original Message- From: Mahadev Konar [mailto:maha...@hortonworks.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 8:20 AM To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org Cc: Eugene Koontz; Vishal Kher; Benjamin Reed Subject: Re: 3.4 Release. Looks like jenkins is still having issues. Until then we can fi

Re: 3.4 Release.

liner. > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:35 AM, Mahadev Konar wrote: > >> HI all, >> The 3.4 release is making good progress. I think we are a week or so >> away from the release getting out. >> We have 11 open issues and 16 PA's. >> >> Most of the PA

Re: 3.4 Release.

Hi Mahadev, ZOOKEEPER-1006 is fixed. ZOOKEEPER-1090<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1090>should go in 3.4.0 as well. I have patch available on the jira. It is one liner. On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:35 AM, Mahadev Konar wrote: > HI all, > The 3.4 release is making good

Re: 3.4 Release.

Hi Mahadev and all zookeeper devs, Thank you for kicking off this discussion! Let me respond to each in turn: -Eugene On 07/18/2011 12:35 AM, Mahadev Konar wrote: ZOOKEEPER-1155. Eugene/Vishal can you folks please take a look and update the jira? https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEE

3.4 Release.

HI all, The 3.4 release is making good progress. I think we are a week or so away from the release getting out. We have 11 open issues and 16 PA's. Most of the PA's are good to get in or are most likely to be checked in by this week. For the Open issues: ZOOKEEPER-1155. Eug