Hi Matthias,

I think it makes sense to include it into 2.6.1.
There's also been a couple of other fixes (KAFKA-10705, KAFKA-10706)
ported to 2.6

I'll roll a new RC

Thanks

On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 12:04 AM Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Mickael,
>
> we discovered a regression bug in Kafka Streams today that was
> introduced in the 2.6.0 release. It affects EOS users, what is a growing
> percentage of Kafka Streams users.
>
> I marked it as critical for now, but would propose it as a blocker for
> 2.6.1. What do you think? Can we roll a new RC to include a fix in 2.6.1?
>
> A PR is already under review.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-10755
>
>
> -Matthias
>
> On 11/12/20 4:17 PM, Mickael Maison wrote:
> > Hello Kafka users, developers and client-developers,
> >
> > This is the first candidate for release of Apache Kafka 2.6.1.
> >
> > Apache Kafka 2.6.1 is a bugfix release and fixes 35 issues since the
> > 2.6.0 release. Please see the release notes for more information.
> >
> > Release notes for the 2.6.1 release:
> > https://home.apache.org/~mimaison/kafka-2.6.1-rc0/RELEASE_NOTES.html
> >
> > *** Please download, test and vote by Thursday, November 19, 5pm PT
> >
> > Kafka's KEYS file containing PGP keys we use to sign the release:
> > https://kafka.apache.org/KEYS
> >
> > * Release artifacts to be voted upon (source and binary):
> > https://home.apache.org/~mimaison/kafka-2.6.1-rc0/
> >
> > * Maven artifacts to be voted upon:
> > https://repository.apache.org/content/groups/staging/org/apache/kafka/
> >
> > * Javadoc:
> > https://home.apache.org/~mimaison/kafka-2.6.1-rc0/javadoc/
> >
> > * Tag to be voted upon (off 2.6 branch) is the 2.6.1 tag:
> > https://github.com/apache/kafka/releases/tag/2.6.1-rc0
> >
> > * Documentation:
> > https://kafka.apache.org/26/documentation.html
> >
> > * Protocol:
> > https://kafka.apache.org/26/protocol.html
> >
> > * Successful Jenkins builds for the 2.6 branch:
> > Unit/integration tests: https://builds.apache.org/job/kafka-2.6-jdk8/51/
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mickael
> >

Reply via email to