ghost
commented
7 years ago cf-release Release Candidate SHA for v253: 82fb38a836541c14fe0d5058f5e97420f4b7c2ea
Please read these instructions, as they changed on 4 Nov 2015.
- Edit this comment by setting the approval for your section (delete the thumb you don't want)
- Also set your GitHub handle as the approver
- Add any additional comments you may have in your section
- If you notice you are the last person to set your approval, as a courtesy please also add a new comment to the issue saying so, so that we get GitHub notifications that all approvals are done.
@dsabeti, @JesseTAlford: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the release integration team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
- Approval: :+1: / :-1:
- Decider:
- Comments:
@evanfarrar, @christianang: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the infrastructure team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
- Approval: :+1:
- Decider: @christianang
- Comments:
@valeriap, @smoser-ibm: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the postgres-release team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
- Approval: :+1:
- Decider: @valeriap
- Comments: Working on a bug but it's already in v252.
@shalako, @shashwathi: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the routing team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
- Approval: :+1:
- Decider: Shannon
- Comments:
@sreetummidi, @plfx: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the identity team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
- Approval: :+1: / :-1:
- Decider:
- Comments:
@ahevenor, @jasonkeene: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the Loggregator team? Do the a1 logging metrics look nominal? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
- Approval: :+1: / :-1:
- Decider:
- Comments:
@zrob, @gerg: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the CAPI team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
- Approval: :+1: / :-1:
- Decider:
- Comments:
@sclevine, @dgodd: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the Buildpacks and Stacks team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
- Approval: :+1:
- Decider: @sclevine
- Comments:
@nebhale, @cgfrost: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the Java Buildpack team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
- Approval: :+1:
- Decider: @nebhale
- Comments:
v3.13
@ematpl, @jfmyers9: Can you provide a compatible diego-release SHA or final release version?
- Approval: :+1:
- Decider: @ematpl
- Comments: Diego 1.8.1 / GR 1.2.0 / cflinuxfs2 1.53.0 / netman 0.17.0 are compatible.
@rusha19, @jaydunk: Can you provide a compatible cf-networking-release SHA or final release version?
- Approval: :+1: / :-1:
- Decider:
- Comments:
@fraenkel, @sykesm: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the DEA + HM9000 team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
- Approval: :+1: / :-1:
- Decider:
- Comments:
dsabeti
cf-release Release Candidate SHA for v253: a3f129bcb4f425ae15b78268caa19727fabdfa17
Please read these instructions, as they changed on 4 Nov 2015.
@dsabeti, @JesseTAlford: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the release integration team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
@evanfarrar, @christianang: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the infrastructure team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
@valeriap, @smoser-ibm: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the postgres-release team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
@shalako, @shashwathi: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the routing team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
@sreetummidi, @plfx: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the identity team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
@ahevenor, @jasonkeene: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the Loggregator team? Do the a1 logging metrics look nominal? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
@zrob, @gerg: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the CAPI team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
@sclevine, @dgodd: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the Buildpacks and Stacks team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
@nebhale, @cgfrost: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the Java Buildpack team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?
v3.13@ematpl, @jfmyers9: Can you provide a compatible diego-release SHA or final release version?
@rusha19, @jaydunk: Can you provide a compatible cf-networking-release SHA or final release version?
@fraenkel, @sykesm: Does this cf-release SHA look good for the DEA + HM9000 team? Any bugs, regressions, or incomplete features of concern?