I have merged GEODE-5594 to develop. GEODE-5338 is now waiting for PR review and precheckin.
Sai 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> >> > >> >
