Re: [DISCUSSION] Next release roadmap

I plan to work on the following 1. CASSANDRA-12106 Blacklisting bad partitions - Rework patch and solicit for feedback/review and have it committed 2. CASSANDRA-14557 D

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove support for `test.runners` and `testparallel`

+1 to remove ant test parallelism and leverage container for it. - Yifan > On Apr 13, 2021, at 4:00 AM, Angelo Polo wrote: > > Docker doesn't run natively on FreeBSD (though work is underway to enable > that). It's possible to run Docker Machine inside VirtualBox so maybe > that's workable, ot

Re: building trunk, and switching branches, with lib/ removed from trunk, and offline mode…

Hi Mick, it is here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16597 On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 at 13:24, Michael Semb Wever wrote: > > > > > Actually, I am not completely sure if Maven wrapper will play nicely > > with Ant stuff of yours as maybe it indeed looks for "mvn" on path and > > wrapper

Re: building trunk, and switching branches, with lib/ removed from trunk, and offline mode…

> Actually, I am not completely sure if Maven wrapper will play nicely > with Ant stuff of yours as maybe it indeed looks for "mvn" on path and > wrapper is invoked differently so it does not have to necessarily see > it. I ll check it and let you know. I misunderstood you Stefan. If you woul

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove support for `test.runners` and `testparallel`

Docker doesn't run natively on FreeBSD (though work is underway to enable that). It's possible to run Docker Machine inside VirtualBox so maybe that's workable, otherwise I suppose I can live without parallel testing for now since I'm probably the only one. Best, Angelo On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 10

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove support for `test.runners` and `testparallel`

> +1 after chatting with Mick who clarified the picture for me. Thx Mick. 👍 I'm +1 as well to removing test.runner and testparallel support, from all branches. CASSANDRA-16595 has been created. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-uns

Re: [DISCUSS] Remove support for `test.runners` and `testparallel`

+1 after chatting with Mick who clarified the picture for me. Thx Mick. On 12/4/21 20:32, Brandon Williams wrote: > While I'm certain we could push through all these tests to support > parallelism, I think it will end up requiring continual work since > there is a class of tests that won't always