Yes, the release guide has a segment "Update release specific configurations" that has a tidbit about this.
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Alan Myrvold <amyrv...@google.com> wrote: > The dataflow java worker version wasn't updated on the branch as in past > releases ... should it be? > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-3815 > > > On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 1:40 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Can still be provided as a generic one (like the an offset or key based >> one) but good enough for now, right, was just surprising to not see it when >> checking the breakage. >> >> Le 8 mars 2018 22:05, "Eugene Kirpichov" <kirpic...@google.com> a écrit : >> >> All SDF-related method annotations in DoFn are marked @Experimental. I >> guess that should apply to RestrictionTracker too, but I wouldn't be too >> worried about that, since it only makes sense to use in the context of >> those methods. >> >> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 12:36 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hmm, does sdf api misses some @Experimental then? >>> >>> To clarify: for waitUntilFinish I'm fine with the 2.4 as this but cant >>> +1 or +0 since none of my tests pass reliably in current state without a >>> retry strategy making the call useless. >>> >>> Le 8 mars 2018 21:02, "Reuven Lax" <re...@google.com> a écrit : >>> >>>> Does Nexmark use SerializableCoder? >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:42 AM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I put the validation checklist spreadsheet is up at >>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qk- >>>>> N5vjXvbcEk68GjbkSZTR8AGqyNUM-oLFo_ZXBpJw/edit?ts=5a1c7310# >>>>> gid=1663314475 >>>>> >>>>> Regarding the direct runner regression on query 10, this is >>>>> understandable given how mutation detection has been changed for >>>>> serializable coders (and should be tracked, probably fixed by avoiding >>>>> SerializableCoder). It should not affect other runners. Could you file a >>>>> bug? >>>>> >>>>> Regarding waitUntilFinish, this is a bug but not a blocker--it's been >>>>> this way since teardown was introduced. There are many nice-to-haves that >>>>> one could merge from master to the release branch, but we've seen where >>>>> that trend leads. >>>>> >>>>> Regarding the backwards incompatible changes in restriction tracker, >>>>> this is (as I understand it) a change to the experimental SDF API. Eugene, >>>>> do you want to comment on this? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 2:07 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I confirm that the new release fixes both problems reported >>>>>> previously: >>>>>> >>>>>> - python package name >>>>>> - nexmark query 10 mutability issue with the direct runner. >>>>>> >>>>>> One extra regression is that the the fix produced a way longer >>>>>> execution time on the query. >>>>>> Not sure if a blocker but worth tracking. >>>>>> >>>>>> Query 10 - Batch/Bounded >>>>>> Version Runtime(sec) Events(/sec) Results >>>>>> 2.3.0 3.6 27609.1 1 >>>>>> 2.4.0 30.8 3244.3 1 >>>>>> >>>>>> Query 10 - Streaming/Unbounded >>>>>> Version Runtime(sec) Events(/sec) Results >>>>>> 2.3.0 6.3 15873.0 1 >>>>>> 2.4.0 101.1 989.4 1 >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 8:54 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>> <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> > -1: >>>>>> > a) still consider waitUntilFinish broken and a big blocker >>>>>> > b) restrictiontracker api changed and is not backward compatible >>>>>> > (https://github.com/apache/beam/commit/ >>>>>> e0034314ad196d2274cef9831ed63e090bf4d4c1#diff- >>>>>> 098d7247eb1e9d9423bfa2ae2da38a9d) >>>>>> > >>>>>> > with workarounds and fixes for these two issues the other parts >>>>>> work (spark, >>>>>> > flink, direct runner, java core) on my projects >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>> > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book >>>>>> > >>>>>> > 2018-03-08 6:26 GMT+01:00 Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com>: >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Hi everyone, >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Please review and vote on the release candidate #2 for the version >>>>>> 2.4.0, >>>>>> >> 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 BDC9 89B0 1BD2 A463 >>>>>> 6010 >>>>>> >> A1CA 8F15 5E09 610D 69FB [3], >>>>>> >> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [4], >>>>>> >> * source code tag "v2.4.0-RC2" [5], >>>>>> >> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API >>>>>> >> reference >>>>>> >> manual [6]. >>>>>> >> * Java artifacts were built with Maven 3.2.5 and OpenJDK 1.8.0_112. >>>>>> >> * Python artifact are deployed along with the source release to the >>>>>> >> dist.apache.org [2]. If I am able to figure out how to build the >>>>>> wheels, I >>>>>> >> will post them there as well. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by >>>>>> majority >>>>>> >> approval, with at least 3 PMC affirmative votes. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Thanks, >>>>>> >> - Robert >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> [1] >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa? >>>>>> version=12342682&projectId=12319527 >>>>>> >> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.4.0/ >>>>>> >> [3] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/KEYS >>>>>> >> [4] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/ >>>>>> orgapachebeam-1030/ >>>>>> >> [5] https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.4.0-RC2 >>>>>> >> [6] https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/398 >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>> >>
