PR merged, and followed up with reworked addition around checking the reproducibility:
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/blob/main/RELEASING.adoc#verify-build-reproducibility https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/commit/ef09a95fb206af49bc91c0b4966f15075b292c10 On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 at 12:31, Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, crap...I just added a whole section about the reproducibility > checks before seeing this, and hadn't noticed your other PR. I'll > review the PR and perhaps revert my change, merge, and then redo it. > > On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 at 22:03, Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > I plan on adding steps to the release documentation to mitigate this in the > > future including how to verify reproducibility. > > > > At the moment I already have a PR [1] for other, unrelated updates to the > > release doc that I'd like to get merged first, though. > > > > > > Justin > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/5304 > > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 3:59 PM Clebert Suconic <clebert.suco...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > I don't understand how to avoid this in the future... and how to check it? > > > I think we should update the RELEASE.md with steps to verify and avoid it > > > but I don't understand it 100%.. just that something got the wrong mask on > > > Justin's env causing a reproducing issue. > > > > > > Clebert Suconic > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 3:05 PM Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I'm cancelling this vote due to the build-reproducibility issue that > > > Robbie > > > > outlined. > > > > > > > > > > > > Justin > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 1:58 PM Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > For the sake of clarity and consistency I'm going to cancel this vote, > > > > > re-spin to fix the build-repeatability issue, and send another vote. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for testing this, Robbie! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Justin > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 9:39 AM Robbie Gemmell < > > > robbie.gemm...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> As an explainer, the cause for the reproducibility check failing > > > > >> looks > > > > >> to be from a difference in umask between Justin's env and those used > > > > >> for previous releases and in turn the Reproducible Central buildspec > > > > >> used to verify the reproducibility. > > > > >> > > > > >> On previous systems that did the release, a umask of [0]022 was in > > > > >> effect. On Justins, a umask of [0]002 was in effect. When I changed > > > > >> umask to [0]002 I was then able to do a 100% reproduction of the > > > > >> build. > > > > >> > > > > >> I'm not yet clear on why, but for the 3 war files in the build, the > > > > >> permissions on the embedded maven detail files (but none of the > > > > >> actual > > > > >> content files) are influenced by the umask: > > > > >> META-INF/maven/<groupId>/<artifact-id>/pom.xml > > > > >> META-INF/maven/<groupId>/<artifact-id>/pom.properties > > > > >> > > > > >> The war files contents then in turn influence the binary assembly and > > > > >> related checksum files, giving a total of 7 differences in the > > > > >> overall > > > > >> build. None of the 'actual content' differs as such, just the > > > > >> permissions, the metadata for which throws off the overall assembly. > > > > >> > > > > >> The same type of generated files are also embedded in all the jar > > > > >> files, but are not influenced by the differing umasks so the jars all > > > > >> came out the same regardless. > > > > >> > > > > >> We could either proceed and try to update the buildspec at > > > > >> Reproducible Central to compensate (and then need to update it again > > > > >> to switch back in future if we make things consistent). Or we could > > > > >> redeploy the build to make this consistent with prior releases, the > > > > >> binary assembly and sig+checksum would get updated, as would the sig > > > > >> for the source release (embedded timestamp) though not the source > > > > >> archive itself. > > > > >> > > > > >> Thoughts, Justin? > > > > >> > > > > >> On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 at 17:26, Robbie Gemmell < > > > robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > -1, for now at least. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > The deployed convenience binaries failed a reproducibility check, > > > even > > > > >> > though all the sub-content in them ultimately seems to be the same > > > as > > > > >> > in the rebuild. A permissions difference in a few modules (the 3 > > > > >> > console war files) META-INF files seems to be the cause, which in > > > turn > > > > >> > rippled through to the binary assembly archives as a whole. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I'd like to try some redeployments on Monday to see whether we > > > > >> > could > > > > >> > resolve the issue, or at least isolate a reason/env-difference that > > > > >> > prompts it. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Note -1's are not a veto on releases, and even with my -1 it still > > > > >> > meets the criteria necessary to proceed, i.e can currently still be > > > > >> > released as-is if so desired. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I checked things over as follows: > > > > >> > - Verified the signature + checksum files. > > > > >> > - Checked for LICENCE + NOTICE files in the archives. > > > > >> > - Checked licence headers in the source archive by running: > > > > >> > "mvn apache-rat:check" > > > > >> > - Ran the Qpid JMS 2.6.1 HelloWorld against a broker from the > > > > >> > binary > > > > >> > archive on JDK 17. > > > > >> > - Ran the source build and the AMQP integration tests on JDK 17 > > > with: > > > > >> > "mvn clean install -DskipTests && cd tests/integration-tests/ && > > > mvn > > > > >> > -Ptests > > > > >> > -Dtest=org.apache.activemq.artemis.tests.integration.amqp.** > > > > >> > test" > > > > >> > - Verified the build reproducibility using the tooling at > > > Reproducible > > > > >> > Central, which failed as per above. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Robbie > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 at 17:13, Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > I would like to propose an Apache ActiveMQ Artemis 2.38.0 > > > > >> > > release. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Highlights include: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > - WebSocket compression is now supported. This compression can be > > > > used > > > > >> > > transparently for AMQP, STOMP, or MQTT when communication is over > > > > >> > > WebSockets. > > > > >> > > - The ActiveMQServerMessagePlugin now has a messageMoved() > > > callback. > > > > >> > > - Core bridge configuration now supports client-id which will > > > > >> > > make > > > > it > > > > >> much > > > > >> > > easier to identify bridge connections on remote brokers. > > > > >> > > - The consumer CLI command now supports consuming messages > > > > "forever." > > > > >> > > - The authentication & authorization caches now have detailed > > > debug > > > > >> logging. > > > > >> > > - There’s been a handful of updates to broker management > > > including: > > > > >> > > - The documentation has been improved with more examples for > > > > >> Jolokia > > > > >> > > and a new sub-section on management method option syntax. > > > > >> > > - It’s now possible to pass empty "options" to the management > > > > >> methods > > > > >> > > that accept them. > > > > >> > > - The management methods which return paged results can now > > > > >> return all > > > > >> > > the results together by specifying -1 for either the page or the > > > > >> pageSize. > > > > >> > > - The management method option syntax now supports the > > > > NOT_EQUALS > > > > >> > > operator for greater flexibility with filtering results of > > > > management > > > > >> > > operations. > > > > >> > > - Configuration for diverts created via management can now be > > > > >> done via > > > > >> > > JSON. > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > The release notes can be found here: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12315920&version=12355013 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Ths git commit report is here: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > https://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/download/commit-report-2.38.0 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Source and binary distributions can be found here: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/activemq/activemq-artemis/2.38.0/ > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > The Maven staging repository is here: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapacheactivemq-1410 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > If you would like to validate the release: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > https://activemq.apache.org/components/artemis/documentation/hacking-guide/#validating-releases > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > It is tagged in the git repo as <version> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > [ ] +1 approve this release > > > > >> > > [ ] +0 no opinion > > > > >> > > [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Here's my +1 > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Justin > > > > >> > > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@activemq.apache.org > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@activemq.apache.org > > > > >> For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@activemq.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@activemq.apache.org For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
