I've just fixed GEODE-5661 (Pulse does not work when legacy SSL options are used) that I'd also like included. PR is approved and I will merge it in after standup.
--Jens On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 3:42 PM Sai Boorlagadda <sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> wrote: > Develop pipeline is not dependent on Windows jobs and the initial reason > being not to slow down the pipeline. > But the WindowsIntegrationTest has not had a consistent green runs and is > red either > - due to gradle crashing half-way through (not enough memory?) or > - a flaky test > > So should we be considering windows jobs for the release 1.7.0? > Pipeline does not already depend on windows jobs, so we can ignore those > jobs for 1.7.0 or make them invisible until they are stable? > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:37 PM Kenneth Howe <kh...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > I expect to close PR#2368 for GEODE-5590 without merging it due to > > unexpected test failures in other test categories. > > > > Instead I have PR#2389 (for GEODE 5601) to attain stable test results for > > AcceptanceTests. This is a simpler fix to the problem at the expense of a > > slightly longer runtime for AcceptanceTests (~2min). > > > > Once we have reliable test results we can take additional time to improve > > the build/test process for future releases. > > > > > On Aug 28, 2018, at 10:48 AM, Sai Boorlagadda < > sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > I waiting for a green precheckin for GEODE-5594. > > > > > > Sai > > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:43 AM Alexander Murmann < > amurm...@pivotal.io> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Thanks for chiming in, Sai! Are you at this point waiting for more > > reviews? > > >> > > >> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:30 AM, Sai Boorlagadda < > > >> sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com > > >>> wrote: > > >> > > >>> GEODE-5338 is downvoted for the security concerns related to trusting > > >>> the default trust store and thus resulted in an improvement to add a > > >>> hostname > > >>> validation as a feature before we can support trusting default trust > > >> store. > > >>> > > >>> So GEODE-5338 is blocked by GEODE-5594. > > >>> > > >>> Once I merge GEODE-5594, I will reinitiate review on GEODE-5338 PR. > > >>> > > >>> Sai > > >>> > > >>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Alexander Murmann < > > amurm...@pivotal.io> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Looks like we are now waiting for these tickets: > > >>>> > > >>>> GEODE-5601 which is a dup of GEODE-5590 which has this open PR: > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2368. > > >>>> GEODE-5594 has open PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346 > > >>>> GEODE-5338 <https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2346GEODE-5338> > has > > >>> open > > >>>> PR: https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2244. > > >>>> > > >>>> Does this look right? > > >>>> > > >>>> The GEODE-5338 ticket is the most concerning to me right now. The PR > > >> was > > >>>> down voted, had some down voted discussion and nothing since. Sai > > >>> mentioned > > >>>> yesterday that this might be able to merge. That's surprising given > > the > > >>>> downvotes and lack of discussion. Sai, do you want to give us a > > update, > > >>>> maybe on the PR? > > >>>> > > >>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 1:31 AM, Juan José Ramos <jra...@pivotal.io > > > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Thanks!! > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 9:13 AM Nabarun Nag <n...@apache.org> > wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> Hi Juan, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> GEODE-5618 as PR#2360 has been merged in to develop. The new > branch > > >>> has > > >>>>> not > > >>>>>> yet been created hence this fix will be in 1.7.0 > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Regards > > >>>>>> Nabarun Nag > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:33 AM Juan José Ramos < > > >> jra...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Hello team, > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Can we also include GEODE-5618 in the next release?. The pull > > >>> request > > >>>>> has > > >>>>>>> been approved already, it just needs to be merged. > > >>>>>>> Best regards. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:45 PM Bruce Schuchardt < > > >>>>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> great! thanks > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 1:42 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> I completely agree. Once the branch is created, it will > > >> undergo > > >>>> all > > >>>>>>>>> compatibility and upgrade tests. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> The commit that you have mentioned will be reverted in 1.7.0, > > >>> as > > >>>>> well > > >>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>> any related commits > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Regards > > >>>>>>>>> Nabarun Nag > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 1:34 PM Bruce Schuchardt < > > >>>>>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> I don't think it's as easy as doing a rebase. Someone added > > >>> the > > >>>>> 1.8 > > >>>>>>>>>> version to Version.java and we need to revert that. We also > > >>>> need > > >>>>> to > > >>>>>>> see > > >>>>>>>>>> if it's being used anywhere for backward-compatibility. If > > >>> it's > > >>>>> in > > >>>>>>> use > > >>>>>>>>>> those changes need to be examined and probably undone on the > > >>>>> branch > > >>>>>> if > > >>>>>>>>>> they're targeting 1.7 peers/clients. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 12:11 PM, Nabarun Nag wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> @Bruce those changes were done when 1.7.0 release process > > >> was > > >>>>>>>>>> in-progress, > > >>>>>>>>>>> and a release branch was already created. But we stopped > > >> that > > >>>>>> process > > >>>>>>>> mid > > >>>>>>>>>>> way. This happened in May 2018. > > >>>>>>>>>>> We are planning to rebase the 1.7.0 brach with the current > > >>>>> develop > > >>>>>>>> pretty > > >>>>>>>>>>> soon. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Regards > > >>>>>>>>>>> Nabarun > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02 PM Bruce Schuchardt < > > >>>>>>>>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like we've cut a 1.7.0 release branch that says > > >> its > > >>>>>> 1.8.0. > > >>>>>>>> Is > > >>>>>>>>>>>> that intentional? > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> private static final byte GEODE_180_ORDINAL =95; > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> public static final VersionGEODE_180 = > > >>>>>>>>>>>> new Version("GEODE","1.8.0", (byte)1, (byte)8, > > >>> (byte)0, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> (byte)0,GEODE_180_ORDINAL); > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/27/18 9:50 AM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> After reading through the weekend, validating against CN > > >>> as a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> fallback should be acceptable and dont have any further > > >>>>> concerns > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> with default JDK's implementation as expressed[1]. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Planning to merge GEODE-5594 today and following with > > >>>>> GEODE-5338. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/906540e18fa6f85fc77c88c28fc74a > > >>>>> 61402471d2eed4ee9dab4813c9@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM Sai Boorlagadda < > > >>>>>>>>>>>> sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regarding GEODE-5594, though the current implementation > > >> is > > >>>>> good > > >>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>> needed > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> more coverage. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> While adding tests to cover negative cases, I found > > >>>> something > > >>>>>>> about > > >>>>>>>>>>>> JDK's > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> default implementation of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hostname validation which I am not happy about and so it > > >>>>> needs a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rethought. It could result in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementing our own custom algorithm to do hostname > > >>>>> validation. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I will send out details and seek to advise on what we > > >>> should > > >>>>> do > > >>>>>>> in a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> different thread. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sai > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 10:52 AM Alexander Murmann < > > >>>>>>>>>> amurm...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To summarize where we are right now in this > > >> discussion, I > > >>>> see > > >>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tickets listed in this thread as want-to-haves for 1.7: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GEODE-5615 - ✅ resolved > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GEODE-5601 - 🏃♀️ in progress > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GEODE-5594 - 🏃♀️ waiting for PR review > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GEODE-5338 - 🏃♀️ waiting for PR review > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - GEODE-5619 - 🙄 in progress in JIRA but has > > >>> merged > > >>>>> PR. > > >>>>>>> What > > >>>>>>>>>> does > > >>>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mean? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything else that needs to go into 1.7? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It seems like the best we all can do is to review Sai's > > >>>> PRs. > > >>>>> Is > > >>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Jens Deppe < > > >>>>>> jde...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd also like to include GEODE-5619 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:59 PM Xiaojian Zhou < > > >>>>>> gz...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The release will be a great one with so many > > >> historical > > >>>>> bugs > > >>>>>>>> fixed. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today I tried to use IJ to build and run with latest > > >>>>>>> build.gradle > > >>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recent moved test packages, it worked. So this > > >>>> refactoring > > >>>>> is > > >>>>>>>> also > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> success. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Anthony Baker < > > >>>>>>>> aba...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I most definitely agree! > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 21, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Dan Smith < > > >>>>> dsm...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we do want to wait for GEODE-5615 > > >>>>> (DistributedTest > > >>>>>>>> OOMEs) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GEODE-5601 (AcceptanceTest port conflicts) to be > > >>> fixed > > >>>>>> before > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cutting > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> new 1.7 branch. It would be better if we don't > > >>> create a > > >>>>>>> release > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a point where we have these systematic issues with > > >>> our > > >>>>>>>> pipeline. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella > > >>>>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer > > >>>>>>> Email: jra...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 <+353%2021%20423%208611> > > >>>>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 <+353%2087%20207%204066> > > >>>>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 <(877)%20477-2269> > > >>>>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 - 16:00 GMT > > >>>>>>> How to upload artifacts: > > >>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073 > > >>>>>>> How to escalate a ticket: > > >>>>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556 > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image: twitter] > > >>>>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin] > > >>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image: facebook] > > >>>>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google plus] > > >>>>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube] > > >>>>>>> < > > >>>>>> > > >>>> > > >> > > https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -- > > >>>>> Juan José Ramos Cassella > > >>>>> Senior Technical Support Engineer > > >>>>> Email: jra...@pivotal.io > > >>>>> Office#: +353 21 4238611 > > >>>>> Mobile#: +353 87 2074066 > > >>>>> After Hours Contact#: +1 877 477 2269 > > >>>>> Office Hours: Mon - Thu 08:30 - 17:00 GMT. Fri 08:30 - 16:00 GMT > > >>>>> How to upload artifacts: > > >>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/204369073 > > >>>>> How to escalate a ticket: > > >>>>> https://support.pivotal.io/hc/en-us/articles/203809556 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> [image: support] <https://support.pivotal.io/> [image: twitter] > > >>>>> <https://twitter.com/pivotal> [image: linkedin] > > >>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/3048967> [image: facebook] > > >>>>> <https://www.facebook.com/pivotalsoftware> [image: google plus] > > >>>>> <https://plus.google.com/+Pivotal> [image: youtube] > > >>>>> < > > >>>> > > >> > > https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAdzTan_eSPScpj2J50ErtzR9ANSzv3kl > > >>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > >
