-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.6k
Add release notes for 6.7.0 #38840
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
Add release notes for 6.7.0 #38840
Conversation
|
Pinging @elastic/es-docs |
| * Create snapshot role {pull}35820[#35820] (issue: {issue}34454[#34454]) | ||
|
|
||
| CCR:: | ||
| * Integrate retention leases to recovery from remote [OPEN] {pull}38829[#38829] (issue: {issue}37165[#37165]) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We need to fix the labels on this one as the PR is showing as still open. We should label it as 6.7.1 for now and then the relabel process will move it back to 7.0.0 when a build candidate contains this change after its merged
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, I missed that this one is still open. Thanks for spotting.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As discussed offline, we expect that this particular PR will be included in 6.7.0 and thus I will not relabel but only remove it from the release notes for now.
|
|
||
| Infra/Core:: | ||
| * Use DateFormatter in monitoring instead of joda code {pull}38309[#38309] | ||
| * Use dateformatter in ingest-common to log deprecations {pull}38099[#38099] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure these should be labelled with upgrade since they are not changing the version of a dependency. >enhancement or >bug seems more appropriate for these?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Makes sense. I've relabelled the PRs accordingly.
|
@colings86 I've addressed your review comments now. Could you please have another look? |
colings86
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, thanks @danielmitterdorfer
|
Sorry I didn't see this sooner. I've created #39155 to make this new release notes page show up in the docs |
No description provided.