8.6.3 Release

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
30 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

8.6.3 Release

Jason Gerlowski
Hi all,

I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
of the bigger changes in 8.7

I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?

Best,

Jason

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Andrzej Białecki-2
I’d like to fix & backport SOLR-14850 & SOLR-14835.

> On 23 Sep 2020, at 16:06, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
> of the bigger changes in 8.7
>
> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?
>
> Best,
>
> Jason
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Ishan Chattopadhyaya
+1

On Wed, 23 Sep, 2020, 8:23 pm Andrzej Białecki, <[hidden email]> wrote:
I’d like to fix & backport SOLR-14850 & SOLR-14835.

> On 23 Sep 2020, at 16:06, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
> of the bigger changes in 8.7
>
> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?
>
> Best,
>
> Jason
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Atri Sharma-3
In reply to this post by Jason Gerlowski
I was planning on a branch cut on 30th September for 8.7 — do we want to delay that?

On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 19:37, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,



I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused

problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an

8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some

of the bigger changes in 8.7



I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a

chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC

to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or

have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?



Best,



Jason



---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]

For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]



--
Regards,

Atri
Apache Concerted
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Jason Gerlowski
> do we want to delay that?

It wasn't my intention to delay 8.7.  The releases will end up being
close together, but they're on different release lines so there's
nothing wrong with that necessarily.  Unless there's something
inherent to the release process that makes it difficult to have two
in-flight simultaneously? (I haven't RM'd a release yet, so there may
well be.  Though now that I think back I'm pretty sure other
committers have done this sort of thing before...)

Was there a particular reason you brought up delaying 8.7?

Jason


On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:11 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I was planning on a branch cut on 30th September for 8.7 — do we want to delay that?
>
> On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 19:37, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>>
>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
>>
>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
>>
>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
>>
>> of the bigger changes in 8.7
>>
>>
>>
>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
>>
>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
>>
>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
>>
>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>
>>
>> Jason
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Atri
> Apache Concerted

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Atri Sharma-3
I am not sure if two close releases are a good idea — would they not lead to potential confusion amongst users?

In any case, I will defer to the opinion of committers.

On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 23:46, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> do we want to delay that?



It wasn't my intention to delay 8.7.  The releases will end up being

close together, but they're on different release lines so there's

nothing wrong with that necessarily.  Unless there's something

inherent to the release process that makes it difficult to have two

in-flight simultaneously? (I haven't RM'd a release yet, so there may

well be.  Though now that I think back I'm pretty sure other

committers have done this sort of thing before...)



Was there a particular reason you brought up delaying 8.7?



Jason





On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:11 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:

>

> I was planning on a branch cut on 30th September for 8.7 — do we want to delay that?

>

> On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 19:37, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:

>>

>> Hi all,

>>

>>

>>

>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused

>>

>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an

>>

>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some

>>

>> of the bigger changes in 8.7

>>

>>

>>

>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a

>>

>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC

>>

>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or

>>

>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?

>>

>>

>>

>> Best,

>>

>>

>>

>> Jason

>>

>>

>>

>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

>>

>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]

>>

>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

>>

>>

>>

> --

> Regards,

>

> Atri

> Apache Concerted



---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]

For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]



--
Regards,

Atri
Apache Concerted
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Ishan Chattopadhyaya
The release process is not conducive to simultaneous releases. We need to space them out.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 12:01 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:
I am not sure if two close releases are a good idea — would they not lead to potential confusion amongst users?

In any case, I will defer to the opinion of committers.

On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 23:46, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> do we want to delay that?



It wasn't my intention to delay 8.7.  The releases will end up being

close together, but they're on different release lines so there's

nothing wrong with that necessarily.  Unless there's something

inherent to the release process that makes it difficult to have two

in-flight simultaneously? (I haven't RM'd a release yet, so there may

well be.  Though now that I think back I'm pretty sure other

committers have done this sort of thing before...)



Was there a particular reason you brought up delaying 8.7?



Jason





On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:11 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:

>

> I was planning on a branch cut on 30th September for 8.7 — do we want to delay that?

>

> On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 19:37, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:

>>

>> Hi all,

>>

>>

>>

>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused

>>

>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an

>>

>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some

>>

>> of the bigger changes in 8.7

>>

>>

>>

>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a

>>

>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC

>>

>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or

>>

>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?

>>

>>

>>

>> Best,

>>

>>

>>

>> Jason

>>

>>

>>

>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

>>

>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]

>>

>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

>>

>>

>>

> --

> Regards,

>

> Atri

> Apache Concerted



---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]

For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]



--
Regards,

Atri
Apache Concerted
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Adrien Grand
Simultaneous releases are problematic for our backward-compatibility tests, but we do not need to wait between releases, we could start the release process right away when 8.6.3 is out. I don't think there's any potential for confusion. We've done this several times in the past, e.g. 7.1.0 was released right after 7.0.1 and 8.4.0 was released right after 8.3.1.

Jason, you mentioned cutting a branch but we only do this for minor releases. Patch versions get released from the minor branch, branch_8_6 in this case, so we don't need to cut a branch and can proceed directly with building a release candidate.

As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we really need to wait one week? If we built a RC on Friday instead for instance and the first vote is successful, we might not even need to delay our current plans for 8.7.

On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 9:18 PM Ishan Chattopadhyaya <[hidden email]> wrote:
The release process is not conducive to simultaneous releases. We need to space them out.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 12:01 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:
I am not sure if two close releases are a good idea — would they not lead to potential confusion amongst users?

In any case, I will defer to the opinion of committers.

On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 23:46, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> do we want to delay that?



It wasn't my intention to delay 8.7.  The releases will end up being

close together, but they're on different release lines so there's

nothing wrong with that necessarily.  Unless there's something

inherent to the release process that makes it difficult to have two

in-flight simultaneously? (I haven't RM'd a release yet, so there may

well be.  Though now that I think back I'm pretty sure other

committers have done this sort of thing before...)



Was there a particular reason you brought up delaying 8.7?



Jason





On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:11 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:

>

> I was planning on a branch cut on 30th September for 8.7 — do we want to delay that?

>

> On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 19:37, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:

>>

>> Hi all,

>>

>>

>>

>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused

>>

>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an

>>

>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some

>>

>> of the bigger changes in 8.7

>>

>>

>>

>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a

>>

>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC

>>

>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or

>>

>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?

>>

>>

>>

>> Best,

>>

>>

>>

>> Jason

>>

>>

>>

>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

>>

>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]

>>

>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

>>

>>

>>

> --

> Regards,

>

> Atri

> Apache Concerted



---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]

For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]



--
Regards,

Atri
Apache Concerted


--
Adrien
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

David Smiley
In reply to this post by Jason Gerlowski
Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3!  I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced).  If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over.  It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression. 

~ David Smiley
Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer


On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
of the bigger changes in 8.7

I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?

Best,

Jason

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Anshum Gupta
Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page.

As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make things easier for the RMs and community.

On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3!  I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced).  If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over.  It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression. 

~ David Smiley
Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer


On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
of the bigger changes in 8.7

I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?

Best,

Jason

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]



--
Anshum Gupta
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Jason Gerlowski
OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving
then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as possible.
My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 by
proposing a bug-fix release.  But the reasons make sense given what
others mentioned above.

> As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we really need to wait one week?

There's no special reason on my end.  I suggested a week to give
others time to backport anything they wanted included, but I'm happy
to start the process as soon as all the expected changes land.

Best,

Jason

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:48 AM Anshum Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page.
>
> As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make things easier for the RMs and community.
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3!  I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced).  If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over.  It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression.
>>
>> ~ David Smiley
>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
>>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
>>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
>>> of the bigger changes in 8.7
>>>
>>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
>>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
>>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
>>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Jason
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>
>
>
> --
> Anshum Gupta

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Atri Sharma-3
I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to
do the 8.6.3 release.

Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving
> then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as possible.
> My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 by
> proposing a bug-fix release.  But the reasons make sense given what
> others mentioned above.
>
> > As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we really need to wait one week?
>
> There's no special reason on my end.  I suggested a week to give
> others time to backport anything they wanted included, but I'm happy
> to start the process as soon as all the expected changes land.
>
> Best,
>
> Jason
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:48 AM Anshum Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page.
> >
> > As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make things easier for the RMs and community.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3!  I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced).  If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over.  It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression.
> >>
> >> ~ David Smiley
> >> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
> >>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
> >>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
> >>> of the bigger changes in 8.7
> >>>
> >>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
> >>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
> >>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
> >>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>>
> >>> Jason
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Anshum Gupta
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


--
Regards,

Atri
Apache Concerted

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

David Smiley
When moving changes from 8.7 to 8.6.3, must we (the mover of an individual change) move the CHANGES.txt entry on all branches -- master, branch_8x, branch_8_6?  I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two.  In the past I have but it's annoying.  Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one go?  If not, I think it'd make sense for that to happen.

~ David Smiley
Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer


On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:22 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:
I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to
do the 8.6.3 release.

Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release.

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving
> then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as possible.
> My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 by
> proposing a bug-fix release.  But the reasons make sense given what
> others mentioned above.
>
> > As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we really need to wait one week?
>
> There's no special reason on my end.  I suggested a week to give
> others time to backport anything they wanted included, but I'm happy
> to start the process as soon as all the expected changes land.
>
> Best,
>
> Jason
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:48 AM Anshum Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page.
> >
> > As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make things easier for the RMs and community.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3!  I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced).  If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over.  It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression.
> >>
> >> ~ David Smiley
> >> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
> >>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
> >>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
> >>> of the bigger changes in 8.7
> >>>
> >>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
> >>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
> >>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
> >>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>>
> >>> Jason
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Anshum Gupta
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


--
Regards,

Atri
Apache Concerted

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Houston Putman
If I recall correctly, thats a step in the release wizard.


- Houston

On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:06 AM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
When moving changes from 8.7 to 8.6.3, must we (the mover of an individual change) move the CHANGES.txt entry on all branches -- master, branch_8x, branch_8_6?  I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two.  In the past I have but it's annoying.  Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one go?  If not, I think it'd make sense for that to happen.

~ David Smiley
Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer


On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:22 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:
I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to


do the 8.6.3 release.





Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release.





On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:


>


> OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving


> then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as possible.


> My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 by


> proposing a bug-fix release.  But the reasons make sense given what


> others mentioned above.


>


> > As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we really need to wait one week?


>


> There's no special reason on my end.  I suggested a week to give


> others time to backport anything they wanted included, but I'm happy


> to start the process as soon as all the expected changes land.


>


> Best,


>


> Jason


>


> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:48 AM Anshum Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:


> >


> > Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page.


> >


> > As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make things easier for the RMs and community.


> >


> > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:


> >>


> >> Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3!  I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced).  If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over.  It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression.


> >>


> >> ~ David Smiley


> >> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer


> >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley


> >>


> >>


> >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:


> >>>


> >>> Hi all,


> >>>


> >>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused


> >>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an


> >>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some


> >>> of the bigger changes in 8.7


> >>>


> >>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a


> >>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC


> >>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or


> >>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?


> >>>


> >>> Best,


> >>>


> >>> Jason


> >>>


> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------


> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]


> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


> >>>


> >


> >


> > --


> > Anshum Gupta


>


> ---------------------------------------------------------------------


> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]


> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


>








--


Regards,





Atri


Apache Concerted





---------------------------------------------------------------------


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]


For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]







Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Jason Gerlowski
Hey all,

I wanted to add 2 more blocker tickets to the list: SOLR-14897 and
SOLR-14898.  These tickets (while bad bugs in their own right) are
especially necessary because they work around a Jetty buffer-reuse bug
(see SOLR-14896) that causes sporadic request failures once triggered.

So that brings the list of 8.6.3 blockers up to: SOLR-14850,
SOLR-14835, SOLR-14897, and SOLR-14898.  (Thanks David for the quick
work on SOLR-14768!)

Additionally, should we also consider a Jetty upgrade for 8.6.3 in
light of the issue mentioned above?  I know it's atypical for bug-fix
releases to change deps, but here the bug is serious and tied directly
to the dep.  SOLR-14897 and SOLR-14898 help greatly here, but the
Jetty bug is likely still a problem for users making requests that
match a specific (albeit rare) profile.  Anyone have thoughts?

Best,

Jason

On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:28 AM Houston Putman <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> If I recall correctly, thats a step in the release wizard.
>
> After checking, I think this fits the bill:
> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/dev-tools/scripts/releaseWizard.yaml#L1435
>
> - Houston
>
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:06 AM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> When moving changes from 8.7 to 8.6.3, must we (the mover of an individual change) move the CHANGES.txt entry on all branches -- master, branch_8x, branch_8_6?  I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two.  In the past I have but it's annoying.  Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one go?  If not, I think it'd make sense for that to happen.
>>
>> ~ David Smiley
>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:22 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to
>>>
>>>
>>> do the 8.6.3 release.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> > OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving
>>>
>>>
>>> > then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as possible.
>>>
>>>
>>> > My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 by
>>>
>>>
>>> > proposing a bug-fix release.  But the reasons make sense given what
>>>
>>>
>>> > others mentioned above.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> > > As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we really need to wait one week?
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> > There's no special reason on my end.  I suggested a week to give
>>>
>>>
>>> > others time to backport anything they wanted included, but I'm happy
>>>
>>>
>>> > to start the process as soon as all the expected changes land.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> > Best,
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> > Jason
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:48 AM Anshum Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > >
>>>
>>>
>>> > > Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page.
>>>
>>>
>>> > >
>>>
>>>
>>> > > As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make things easier for the RMs and community.
>>>
>>>
>>> > >
>>>
>>>
>>> > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >> Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3!  I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced).  If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over.  It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression.
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >> ~ David Smiley
>>>
>>>
>>> > >> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>>
>>>
>>> > >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> Hi all,
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> of the bigger changes in 8.7
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> Best,
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> Jason
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>> > >>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > >
>>>
>>>
>>> > >
>>>
>>>
>>> > > --
>>>
>>>
>>> > > Anshum Gupta
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Atri
>>>
>>>
>>> Apache Concerted
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Erick Erickson
For me, there’s a sharp distinction between changing a dependency in a point release just because there’s a new version, and changing the dependency because there’s a bug in it. That said, if someone can use 8.6.3, what’s stopping them from going to 8.7 when it’e released? Would it make more sense to do the upgrades for 8.7 and get that out the door rather than backport?

FWIW,
Erick

> On Sep 28, 2020, at 1:45 PM, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> I wanted to add 2 more blocker tickets to the list: SOLR-14897 and
> SOLR-14898.  These tickets (while bad bugs in their own right) are
> especially necessary because they work around a Jetty buffer-reuse bug
> (see SOLR-14896) that causes sporadic request failures once triggered.
>
> So that brings the list of 8.6.3 blockers up to: SOLR-14850,
> SOLR-14835, SOLR-14897, and SOLR-14898.  (Thanks David for the quick
> work on SOLR-14768!)
>
> Additionally, should we also consider a Jetty upgrade for 8.6.3 in
> light of the issue mentioned above?  I know it's atypical for bug-fix
> releases to change deps, but here the bug is serious and tied directly
> to the dep.  SOLR-14897 and SOLR-14898 help greatly here, but the
> Jetty bug is likely still a problem for users making requests that
> match a specific (albeit rare) profile.  Anyone have thoughts?
>
> Best,
>
> Jason
>
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:28 AM Houston Putman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> If I recall correctly, thats a step in the release wizard.
>>
>> After checking, I think this fits the bill:
>> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/dev-tools/scripts/releaseWizard.yaml#L1435
>>
>> - Houston
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:06 AM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> When moving changes from 8.7 to 8.6.3, must we (the mover of an individual change) move the CHANGES.txt entry on all branches -- master, branch_8x, branch_8_6?  I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two.  In the past I have but it's annoying.  Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one go?  If not, I think it'd make sense for that to happen.
>>>
>>> ~ David Smiley
>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:22 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> do the 8.6.3 release.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as possible.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 by
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> proposing a bug-fix release.  But the reasons make sense given what
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> others mentioned above.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we really need to wait one week?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> There's no special reason on my end.  I suggested a week to give
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> others time to backport anything they wanted included, but I'm happy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> to start the process as soon as all the expected changes land.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:48 AM Anshum Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make things easier for the RMs and community.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3!  I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced).  If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over.  It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> ~ David Smiley
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> of the bigger changes in 8.7
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Anshum Gupta
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Atri
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Apache Concerted
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Adrien Grand
+1 Erick

On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 8:05 PM Erick Erickson <[hidden email]> wrote:
For me, there’s a sharp distinction between changing a dependency in a point release just because there’s a new version, and changing the dependency because there’s a bug in it. That said, if someone can use 8.6.3, what’s stopping them from going to 8.7 when it’e released? Would it make more sense to do the upgrades for 8.7 and get that out the door rather than backport?

FWIW,
Erick

> On Sep 28, 2020, at 1:45 PM, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> I wanted to add 2 more blocker tickets to the list: SOLR-14897 and
> SOLR-14898.  These tickets (while bad bugs in their own right) are
> especially necessary because they work around a Jetty buffer-reuse bug
> (see SOLR-14896) that causes sporadic request failures once triggered.
>
> So that brings the list of 8.6.3 blockers up to: SOLR-14850,
> SOLR-14835, SOLR-14897, and SOLR-14898.  (Thanks David for the quick
> work on SOLR-14768!)
>
> Additionally, should we also consider a Jetty upgrade for 8.6.3 in
> light of the issue mentioned above?  I know it's atypical for bug-fix
> releases to change deps, but here the bug is serious and tied directly
> to the dep.  SOLR-14897 and SOLR-14898 help greatly here, but the
> Jetty bug is likely still a problem for users making requests that
> match a specific (albeit rare) profile.  Anyone have thoughts?
>
> Best,
>
> Jason
>
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:28 AM Houston Putman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> If I recall correctly, thats a step in the release wizard.
>>
>> After checking, I think this fits the bill:
>> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/dev-tools/scripts/releaseWizard.yaml#L1435
>>
>> - Houston
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:06 AM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> When moving changes from 8.7 to 8.6.3, must we (the mover of an individual change) move the CHANGES.txt entry on all branches -- master, branch_8x, branch_8_6?  I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two.  In the past I have but it's annoying.  Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one go?  If not, I think it'd make sense for that to happen.
>>>
>>> ~ David Smiley
>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:22 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> do the 8.6.3 release.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as possible.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 by
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> proposing a bug-fix release.  But the reasons make sense given what
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> others mentioned above.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we really need to wait one week?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> There's no special reason on my end.  I suggested a week to give
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> others time to backport anything they wanted included, but I'm happy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> to start the process as soon as all the expected changes land.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:48 AM Anshum Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make things easier for the RMs and community.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3!  I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced).  If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over.  It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> ~ David Smiley
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> of the bigger changes in 8.7
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> Anshum Gupta
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Atri
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Apache Concerted
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]



--
Adrien
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Jason Gerlowski
In reply to this post by Erick Erickson
> That said, if someone can use 8.6.3, what’s stopping them from going to 8.7 when it’e released?

The same things that always stop users from going directly to the
latest-and-greatest: fear of instability from new minor-release
features, reliance on behavior changed across minor versions, breaking
changes on Lucene elements that don't guarantee backcompat (e.g.
SOLR-14254), security issues in later versions (new libraries pulled
in with vulns), etc.  There's lots of reasons a given user might want
to stick on 8.6.x rather than 8.7 (in the short/medium term).

I'm ambivalent to whether we upgrade Jetty in 8.6.3 - as I said above
the worst of the Jetty issue should be mitigated by work on our end -
but I think there's a lot of reasons users might not upgrade as far as
we'd expect/like.


On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 2:05 PM Erick Erickson <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> For me, there’s a sharp distinction between changing a dependency in a point release just because there’s a new version, and changing the dependency because there’s a bug in it. That said, if someone can use 8.6.3, what’s stopping them from going to 8.7 when it’e released? Would it make more sense to do the upgrades for 8.7 and get that out the door rather than backport?
>
> FWIW,
> Erick
>
> > On Sep 28, 2020, at 1:45 PM, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I wanted to add 2 more blocker tickets to the list: SOLR-14897 and
> > SOLR-14898.  These tickets (while bad bugs in their own right) are
> > especially necessary because they work around a Jetty buffer-reuse bug
> > (see SOLR-14896) that causes sporadic request failures once triggered.
> >
> > So that brings the list of 8.6.3 blockers up to: SOLR-14850,
> > SOLR-14835, SOLR-14897, and SOLR-14898.  (Thanks David for the quick
> > work on SOLR-14768!)
> >
> > Additionally, should we also consider a Jetty upgrade for 8.6.3 in
> > light of the issue mentioned above?  I know it's atypical for bug-fix
> > releases to change deps, but here the bug is serious and tied directly
> > to the dep.  SOLR-14897 and SOLR-14898 help greatly here, but the
> > Jetty bug is likely still a problem for users making requests that
> > match a specific (albeit rare) profile.  Anyone have thoughts?
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:28 AM Houston Putman <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >> If I recall correctly, thats a step in the release wizard.
> >>
> >> After checking, I think this fits the bill:
> >> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/dev-tools/scripts/releaseWizard.yaml#L1435
> >>
> >> - Houston
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:06 AM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> When moving changes from 8.7 to 8.6.3, must we (the mover of an individual change) move the CHANGES.txt entry on all branches -- master, branch_8x, branch_8_6?  I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two.  In the past I have but it's annoying.  Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one go?  If not, I think it'd make sense for that to happen.
> >>>
> >>> ~ David Smiley
> >>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:22 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> do the 8.6.3 release.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as possible.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 by
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> proposing a bug-fix release.  But the reasons make sense given what
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> others mentioned above.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we really need to wait one week?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> There's no special reason on my end.  I suggested a week to give
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> others time to backport anything they wanted included, but I'm happy
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> to start the process as soon as all the expected changes land.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Best,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Jason
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:48 AM Anshum Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make things easier for the RMs and community.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3!  I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced).  If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over.  It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> ~ David Smiley
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> problems for some of my usecases.  I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> of the bigger changes in 8.7
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> to follow shortly.  Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> Best,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> Jason
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Anshum Gupta
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Atri
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Apache Concerted
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Cassandra Targett
It looks to me like everything for 8.6.3 is resolved now (https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SOLR/versions/12348713), and it seems from comments in SOLR-14897 and SOLR-14898 that those fixes make a Jetty upgrade less compelling to try.

Are there any other issues not currently marked for 8.6.3 we’re waiting for before starting the RC?
On Sep 29, 2020, 12:04 PM -0500, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]>, wrote:
That said, if someone can use 8.6.3, what’s stopping them from going to 8.7 when it’e released?

The same things that always stop users from going directly to the
latest-and-greatest: fear of instability from new minor-release
features, reliance on behavior changed across minor versions, breaking
changes on Lucene elements that don't guarantee backcompat (e.g.
SOLR-14254), security issues in later versions (new libraries pulled
in with vulns), etc. There's lots of reasons a given user might want
to stick on 8.6.x rather than 8.7 (in the short/medium term).

I'm ambivalent to whether we upgrade Jetty in 8.6.3 - as I said above
the worst of the Jetty issue should be mitigated by work on our end -
but I think there's a lot of reasons users might not upgrade as far as
we'd expect/like.


On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 2:05 PM Erick Erickson <[hidden email]> wrote:

For me, there’s a sharp distinction between changing a dependency in a point release just because there’s a new version, and changing the dependency because there’s a bug in it. That said, if someone can use 8.6.3, what’s stopping them from going to 8.7 when it’e released? Would it make more sense to do the upgrades for 8.7 and get that out the door rather than backport?

FWIW,
Erick

On Sep 28, 2020, at 1:45 PM, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hey all,

I wanted to add 2 more blocker tickets to the list: SOLR-14897 and
SOLR-14898. These tickets (while bad bugs in their own right) are
especially necessary because they work around a Jetty buffer-reuse bug
(see SOLR-14896) that causes sporadic request failures once triggered.

So that brings the list of 8.6.3 blockers up to: SOLR-14850,
SOLR-14835, SOLR-14897, and SOLR-14898. (Thanks David for the quick
work on SOLR-14768!)

Additionally, should we also consider a Jetty upgrade for 8.6.3 in
light of the issue mentioned above? I know it's atypical for bug-fix
releases to change deps, but here the bug is serious and tied directly
to the dep. SOLR-14897 and SOLR-14898 help greatly here, but the
Jetty bug is likely still a problem for users making requests that
match a specific (albeit rare) profile. Anyone have thoughts?

Best,

Jason

On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:28 AM Houston Putman <[hidden email]> wrote:

If I recall correctly, thats a step in the release wizard.

After checking, I think this fits the bill:
https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/dev-tools/scripts/releaseWizard.yaml#L1435

- Houston

On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:06 AM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:

When moving changes from 8.7 to 8.6.3, must we (the mover of an individual change) move the CHANGES.txt entry on all branches -- master, branch_8x, branch_8_6? I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two. In the past I have but it's annoying. Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one go? If not, I think it'd make sense for that to happen.

~ David Smiley
Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley


On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:22 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:

I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to


do the 8.6.3 release.





Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release.





On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:





OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving


then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as possible.


My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 by


proposing a bug-fix release. But the reasons make sense given what


others mentioned above.





As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we really need to wait one week?





There's no special reason on my end. I suggested a week to give


others time to backport anything they wanted included, but I'm happy


to start the process as soon as all the expected changes land.





Best,





Jason





On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:48 AM Anshum Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:





Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page.





As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make things easier for the RMs and community.





On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:





Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3! I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced). If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over. It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression.





~ David Smiley


Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer


http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley








On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:





Hi all,





I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused


problems for some of my usecases. I wanted to volunteer as RM for an


8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some


of the bigger changes in 8.7





I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a


chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC


to follow shortly. Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or


have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?





Best,





Jason





---------------------------------------------------------------------


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]


For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]











--


Anshum Gupta





---------------------------------------------------------------------


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]


For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]











--


Regards,





Atri


Apache Concerted





---------------------------------------------------------------------


To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]


For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]








---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 8.6.3 Release

Jason Gerlowski
The only one that was previously mentioned as a blocker was
SOLR-14835, but from the comments on the ticket it looks like it ended
up being purely a cosmetic issue.  Andrzej left a comment there
suggesting that we "address" this with documentation for 8.6.3 but
otherwise leave it as-is.

So it looks like we're unblocked on starting the release process.
Will begin the preliminary steps this afternoon.

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 3:40 PM Cassandra Targett <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> It looks to me like everything for 8.6.3 is resolved now (https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SOLR/versions/12348713), and it seems from comments in SOLR-14897 and SOLR-14898 that those fixes make a Jetty upgrade less compelling to try.
>
> Are there any other issues not currently marked for 8.6.3 we’re waiting for before starting the RC?
> On Sep 29, 2020, 12:04 PM -0500, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]>, wrote:
>
> That said, if someone can use 8.6.3, what’s stopping them from going to 8.7 when it’e released?
>
>
> The same things that always stop users from going directly to the
> latest-and-greatest: fear of instability from new minor-release
> features, reliance on behavior changed across minor versions, breaking
> changes on Lucene elements that don't guarantee backcompat (e.g.
> SOLR-14254), security issues in later versions (new libraries pulled
> in with vulns), etc. There's lots of reasons a given user might want
> to stick on 8.6.x rather than 8.7 (in the short/medium term).
>
> I'm ambivalent to whether we upgrade Jetty in 8.6.3 - as I said above
> the worst of the Jetty issue should be mitigated by work on our end -
> but I think there's a lot of reasons users might not upgrade as far as
> we'd expect/like.
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 2:05 PM Erick Erickson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> For me, there’s a sharp distinction between changing a dependency in a point release just because there’s a new version, and changing the dependency because there’s a bug in it. That said, if someone can use 8.6.3, what’s stopping them from going to 8.7 when it’e released? Would it make more sense to do the upgrades for 8.7 and get that out the door rather than backport?
>
> FWIW,
> Erick
>
> On Sep 28, 2020, at 1:45 PM, Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> I wanted to add 2 more blocker tickets to the list: SOLR-14897 and
> SOLR-14898. These tickets (while bad bugs in their own right) are
> especially necessary because they work around a Jetty buffer-reuse bug
> (see SOLR-14896) that causes sporadic request failures once triggered.
>
> So that brings the list of 8.6.3 blockers up to: SOLR-14850,
> SOLR-14835, SOLR-14897, and SOLR-14898. (Thanks David for the quick
> work on SOLR-14768!)
>
> Additionally, should we also consider a Jetty upgrade for 8.6.3 in
> light of the issue mentioned above? I know it's atypical for bug-fix
> releases to change deps, but here the bug is serious and tied directly
> to the dep. SOLR-14897 and SOLR-14898 help greatly here, but the
> Jetty bug is likely still a problem for users making requests that
> match a specific (albeit rare) profile. Anyone have thoughts?
>
> Best,
>
> Jason
>
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:28 AM Houston Putman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> If I recall correctly, thats a step in the release wizard.
>
> After checking, I think this fits the bill:
> https://github.com/apache/lucene-solr/blob/master/dev-tools/scripts/releaseWizard.yaml#L1435
>
> - Houston
>
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 12:06 AM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> When moving changes from 8.7 to 8.6.3, must we (the mover of an individual change) move the CHANGES.txt entry on all branches -- master, branch_8x, branch_8_6? I expect the release branch but am unsure of the other two. In the past I have but it's annoying. Does the RM sync CHANGES.txt on the other branches in one go? If not, I think it'd make sense for that to happen.
>
> ~ David Smiley
> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 6:22 AM Atri Sharma <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> I will push the 8.7 release by a week to give Jason enough headroom to
>
>
> do the 8.6.3 release.
>
>
>
>
>
> Jason, let me know if you need me to assist on the 8.6.3 release.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:23 PM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> OK, in that case I'll try my best to keep the 8.6.3 process moving
>
>
>
> then, so Atri can stick as close to his proposed schedule as possible.
>
>
>
> My apologies - I didn't realize I'd be putting the brakes on 8.7 by
>
>
>
> proposing a bug-fix release. But the reasons make sense given what
>
>
>
> others mentioned above.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> As branch_8_6 should be pretty stable by now I wonder if we really need to wait one week?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> There's no special reason on my end. I suggested a week to give
>
>
>
> others time to backport anything they wanted included, but I'm happy
>
>
>
> to start the process as soon as all the expected changes land.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jason
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 1:48 AM Anshum Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Simultaneous releases are also confusing for users, in addition to the back-compat tests as our website chronologically lists our releases and it gets complicated for someone reading the 'News' page.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> As 8.7 isn't a release that needs to be rushed, waiting until 8.6.3 is released and back-compat indexes are pushed will make things easier for the RMs and community.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 1:43 PM David Smiley <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jason: Thanks for volunteering to do an 8.6.3! I recently fixed SOLR-14768, multipart HTTP POST was broken in 8.6 (a regression I introduced). If you can't do the release or need help, I will take over. It's the least I can offer in repentance for the regression.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ~ David Smiley
>
>
>
> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer
>
>
>
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 10:07 AM Jason Gerlowski <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I ran into a query-parsing bug recently in SOLR-14859 that caused
>
>
>
> problems for some of my usecases. I wanted to volunteer as RM for an
>
>
>
> 8.6.3 to get a bugfix release out for users that aren't ready for some
>
>
>
> of the bigger changes in 8.7
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I was thinking of cutting the branch in a week's time to give others a
>
>
>
> chance to backport any bug-fixes they might want included, with an RC
>
>
>
> to follow shortly. Does anyone have any concerns with that plan, or
>
>
>
> have anything they'd like to fix or backport before an 8.6.3 goes out?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jason
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
>
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Anshum Gupta
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
>
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
>
>
> Atri
>
>
> Apache Concerted
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

12