Who can merge excessive backups warning ticket?

[Zhenya Stanilovsky]

Hello, no objections found, plz who can merge it [1]?
 
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12725
 
 
 

[dmagda]

Alex Schrbakov,

As a reviewer, could you merge the changes?


-
Denis


On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 6:15 AM Zhenya Stanilovsky
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hello, no objections found, plz who can merge it [1]?
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12725
>
>
>

[Ivan Pavlukhin]

Merged to master.

Best regards,
Ivan Pavlukhin

пн, 2 мар. 2020 г. в 18:41, Denis Magda <[hidden email]>:

>
> Alex Schrbakov,
>
> As a reviewer, could you merge the changes?
>
>
> -
> Denis
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 6:15 AM Zhenya Stanilovsky
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hello, no objections found, plz who can merge it [1]?
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12725
> >
> >
> >

[Ivan Pavlukhin]

Folks,

Faced a trouble before resolving the ticket [1]. Fix version is set to
2.8.1 and I suppose some changes from master will be cherry-picked to
2.8.1 branch. Do we have 2.8.1 branch?

Best regards,
Ivan Pavlukhin

пн, 2 мар. 2020 г. в 18:42, Ivan Pavlukhin <[hidden email]>:

>
> Merged to master.
>
> Best regards,
> Ivan Pavlukhin
>
> пн, 2 мар. 2020 г. в 18:41, Denis Magda <[hidden email]>:
> >
> > Alex Schrbakov,
> >
> > As a reviewer, could you merge the changes?
> >
> >
> > -
> > Denis
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 6:15 AM Zhenya Stanilovsky
> > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Hello, no objections found, plz who can merge it [1]?
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12725
> > >
> > >
> > >

[Alexey Goncharuk]

Ivan,

Unless I missed something, we do not even have a scope for 2.8.1. As I
recall, there were some important changes that did not get to 2.8.0. As the
voting is close to finish, I think we can kick off a discussion for 2.8.1?

[Maxim Muzafarov]

Folks,


I think the issue should be merged into the master branch first (2.9).
I pinned some critical issues to 2.8.1 which are, from my point, have
to be fixed in 2.8 but still not due to lack of contributions. Since
the scope for 2.8.1 is not fixed and not discussed yet the goal for
such tasks is 2.9.


On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 19:20, Alexey Goncharuk
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Ivan,
>
> Unless I missed something, we do not even have a scope for 2.8.1. As I
> recall, there were some important changes that did not get to 2.8.0. As the
> voting is close to finish, I think we can kick off a discussion for 2.8.1?

[Alexey Goncharuk]

Agree - this is basically what I meant. We should resolve it as 2.9 and
then form the scope for 2.8.1. Sorry for the confusion.

пн, 2 мар. 2020 г. в 19:26, Maxim Muzafarov <[hidden email]>:

> Folks,
>
>
> I think the issue should be merged into the master branch first (2.9).
> I pinned some critical issues to 2.8.1 which are, from my point, have
> to be fixed in 2.8 but still not due to lack of contributions. Since
> the scope for 2.8.1 is not fixed and not discussed yet the goal for
> such tasks is 2.9.
>
>
> On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 19:20, Alexey Goncharuk
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Ivan,
> >
> > Unless I missed something, we do not even have a scope for 2.8.1. As I
> > recall, there were some important changes that did not get to 2.8.0. As
> the
> > voting is close to finish, I think we can kick off a discussion for
> 2.8.1?
>