Hi Ryan, I am currently waiting for the failing DUnit tests to pass and then plan to cut the release branch. Does it work for you if the fixes for GEODE-5972 would be merged to the branch after it has been cut?
On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:57 AM Ryan McMahon <rmcma...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Bill Burcham and I have been working on a data inconsistency issue which > involves a lost event across WAN sites during rebalance on the originating > site. We are currently performing root cause analysis. Below is a Geode > ticket which we will update with more details as we learn more. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-5972 > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:23 PM Ernest Burghardt <eburgha...@pivotal.io> > wrote: > > > and PR 390 has been approved and merged > > > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:10 PM Ernest Burghardt <eburgha...@pivotal.io> > > wrote: > > > > > geode-native fixes are in > > https://github.com/apache/geode-native/pull/390 > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 4:06 PM Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> > wrote: > > > > > >> The geode-native source headers I mentioned in [1] need to be cleaned > > up. > > >> > > >> Anthony > > >> > > >> [1] > > >> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8c9da19d7c0ef0149b1ed79bf0cecde38f17a854ecfa0f0a42f1ff0b@%3Cdev.geode.apache.org%3E > > >> > > >> > On Nov 1, 2018, at 2:01 PM, Bruce Schuchardt < > bschucha...@pivotal.io> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > This PR has been merged to develop > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On 11/1/18 1:35 PM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote: > > >> >> I would like to get this PR in the release: > > >> https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/2757 > > >> >> > > >> >> I'm testing the merge to develop now > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> On 11/1/18 1:18 PM, Sai Boorlagadda wrote: > > >> >>> Sure! agree that we should hold the releases unless there is a > > >> >>> critical issue. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> This is not a gating issue and the code is already committed to > > >> develop. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> Sai > > >> >>> > > >> >>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 1:03 PM Alexander Murmann < > > amurm...@pivotal.io > > >> > > > >> >>> wrote: > > >> >>> > > >> >>>> In the spirit of the previously discussed timed releases, we > should > > >> only > > >> >>>> hold cutting the release for critical issues, that for some > reason > > >> (not > > >> >>>> sure how that might be) should not be fixed after the branch has > > >> been cut. > > >> >>>> Waiting for features leads us down the slippery slope we are > trying > > >> to > > >> >>>> avoid by having timed releases. Does that make sense? > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 12:45 PM Sai Boorlagadda < > > >> sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com > > >> >>>> wrote: > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>>> I would like to resolve GEODE-5338 as it is currently waiting > for > > >> >>>>> doc update. > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> Sai > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:00 AM Alexander Murmann < > > >> amurm...@pivotal.io> > > >> >>>>> wrote: > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>>> Hi everyone, > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >>>>>> It's time to cut the release branch, since we are moving to > time > > >> based > > >> >>>>>> releases. Are there any reasons why a release branch should not > > be > > >> cut > > >> >>>> as > > >> >>>>>> soon as possible? > > >> >>>>>> > > >> >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
