Agreed, since it's a regression. Let's hope that the transitive closure of "revert those two commits" doesn't get to large.
I'll checkout the release-0.5.0 branch and see where we get with reverting. On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 at 19:28 Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com.invalid> wrote: I agree. -1 and let's do the smartest thing to undo the regression. Those two commits are not sufficient to restore late data dropping. You'll also need to revert the switch of the Flink runner to use new DoFn, maybe more. On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > Basically, my question is: is it a regression ? If yes, definitely a -1 > and we should cancel the release. > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but the commits in the LateDataDroppingDoFnRunner > introduced a regression. So, I would cancel this vote and revert the two > commits for RC2. > > WDYT ? > > Regards > JB > > > On 01/31/2017 07:13 PM, Dan Halperin wrote: > >> Should we revert the CLs that lost the functionality? I'd really not like >> to ship a release with such a functional regression.... >> >> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >> wrote: >> >> Fair enough. Let's do that. >>> >>> Thanks ! >>> >>> Regards >>> JB >>> >>> >>> On 01/31/2017 06:58 PM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: >>> >>> I'm not sure. Poperly fixing this will take some time, especially since >>>> we >>>> have to add tests to prevent breakage from happening in the future. >>>> Plus, >>>> if my analysis is correct other runners might also not have proper late >>>> data dropping and it's fine to have a release with some missing >>>> features. >>>> (There's more besides dropping.) >>>> >>>> I think we should go ahead and fix for 0.6. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017, 18:23 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Aljoscha, >>>> >>>>> >>>>> so you propose to cancel this vote to prepare a RC2 ? >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> JB >>>>> >>>>> On 01/31/2017 05:06 PM, Aljoscha Krettek wrote: >>>>> >>>>> It's not just an issue with the Flink Runner, if I'm not mistaken. >>>>>> >>>>>> Flink had late-data dropping via the LateDataDroppingDoFnRunner (which >>>>>> >>>>>> got >>>>> >>>>> "disabled" by the two commits I mention in the issue) while I think >>>>>> that >>>>>> the Apex and Spark Runners might not have had dropping in the first >>>>>> >>>>>> place. >>>>> >>>>> (Not sure about this last part.) >>>>>> >>>>>> As I now wrote to the issue I think this could be a blocker because we >>>>>> don't have the correct output in some cases. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 at 02:16 Davor Bonaci <da...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> It looks good to me, but let's hear Aljoscha's opinion on BEAM-1346. >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A passing suite of Jenkins jobs: >>>>>>> * https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PreCommit_Java_MavenInsta >>>>>>> ll/6870/ >>>>>>> * https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Java_MavenInst >>>>>>> all/2474/ >>>>>>> * >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Java_RunnableO >>>>>>> >>>>>> nService_Apex/336/ >>>>> >>>>> * >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Java_RunnableO >>>>>>> >>>>>> nService_Flink/1470/ >>>>> >>>>> * >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Java_RunnableO >>>>>>> >>>>>> nService_Spark/786/ >>>>> >>>>> * >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PostCommit_Java_RunnableO >>>>>>> >>>>>> nService_Dataflow/2130/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Dan Halperin <dhalp...@apache.org> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I am worried about https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-1346 >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> RC1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> and would at least wait for resolution there before proceeding. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 3:48 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >>>>>>>> j...@nanthrax.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Good catch for the PPMC, I'm upgrading the email template in the >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> release >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> guide (it was a copy/paste). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 01/30/2017 11:50 AM, Sergio Fernández wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +1 (non-binding) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So far I've successfully checked: >>>>>>>>>> * signatures and digests >>>>>>>>>> * source releases file layouts >>>>>>>>>> * matched git tags and commit ids >>>>>>>>>> * incubator suffix and disclaimer >>>>>>>>>> * NOTICE and LICENSE files >>>>>>>>>> * license headers >>>>>>>>>> * clean build (Java 1.8.0_91, Maven 3.3.9, Debian amd64) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Two minor comments that do not block the release: >>>>>>>>>> * Usually I like to see the commit id referencing the rc, since >>>>>>>>>> git >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> tags >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> can be changed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * Just a formality, "PPMC" is not committee that plays a role >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> anymore, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> you're a PMC now ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:55 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> j...@nanthrax.net> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #1 for the >>>>>>>>>>> version >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 0.5.0 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> as follows: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [ ] +1, Approve the release >>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1, Do not approve the release (please provide specific >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> comments) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> The complete staging area is available for your review, which >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> includes: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * JIRA release notes [1], >>>>>>>>>>> * the official Apache source release to be deployed to >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> dist.apache.org >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> [2], which is signed with the key with fingerprint C8282E76 [3], >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4], >>>>>>>>>>> * source code tag "v0.5.0-RC1" [5], >>>>>>>>>>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API >>>>>>>>>>> reference manual [6]. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> majority >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> approval, with at least 3 PPMC affirmative votes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>> JB >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje >>>>>>>>>>> ctId=12319527&version=12338859 >>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/0.5.0/ >>>>>>>>>>> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS >>>>>>>>>>> [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache >>>>>>>>>>> beam-1010/ >>>>>>>>>>> [5] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=beam.git;a=tag;h=r >>>>>>>>>>> efs/tags/v0.5.0-RC1 >>>>>>>>>>> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/132 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>>>>>>> jbono...@apache.org >>>>>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>>>>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>>> jbono...@apache.org >>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>> jbono...@apache.org >>> http://blog.nanthrax.net >>> Talend - http://www.talend.com >>> >>> >> > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > jbono...@apache.org > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com >
