Skip to content

[DOCS] Updates changelog for 6.6.0 #366

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 18, 2019
Merged

[DOCS] Updates changelog for 6.6.0 #366

merged 5 commits into from
Jan 18, 2019

Conversation

lcawl
Copy link
Contributor

@lcawl lcawl commented Jan 16, 2019

This PR adds the following PRs to the changelog for 6.6.0:
#338
#357

@@ -40,10 +40,17 @@

=== Bug Fixes

Fix cause of "Sample out of bounds" error message (See {ml-pull}355[355].}
Fix cause of "Sample out of bounds" error message. {ml-pull}335[335]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should there be a # before the 335 in square brackets?

Fix cause of "Sample out of bounds" error message. {ml-pull}335[335]

Fix hanging autodetect process after it receives a warning about failed
cleanup of forecasts. {ml-pull}352[#352] (issue: {ml-issue}350[#350])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe something more like this?

Fix hang during job close after failure to clean up temporary storage used by forecasting.

Closing the job is where the end user suffers from the problem.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

New forecast requests are also not executed after this happened, plus it requires a large job to run into this, maybe:

Fix hang during job close and forecast execution after temporary storage couldn't be cleaned up when forecasting a large job.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, I've drafted another version of that description.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I suggest to move the entry to 6.6.0, it's listed for 6.5.5 but 6.5.5 has been cancelled (or postponed) and to me it seems it is unlikely that there will be a 6.5.5 before 6.6.0.

This wasn't foreseeable when I backported the fix.

@droberts195, @lcawl what do you think?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The PR listed in the 6.5.5 section is the exact same one that is already listed on lines 45/46 in the 6.6.0 section, so it's probably easiest to just delete the 6.5.5 section.

Or you could take inspiration from the current 6.5.5 description to adjust the 6.6.0 description. They're both intending to say the same thing but feel free to adjust the one we keep if you think one way of saying it is clearer.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

didn't see that!

I agree, lets delete the 6.5.5 and take the nicer one for 6.6.0. I have no strong feeling which one.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks! I've removed the duplicate and will now copy this 6.6 information to the Elasticsearch Release Notes.

Copy link
Contributor

@droberts195 droberts195 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@lcawl lcawl merged commit bbb4919 into elastic:6.6 Jan 18, 2019
@lcawl lcawl deleted the 66-changelog branch January 18, 2019 16:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants