Hi,
Do we have an ETA on the 2.7.0 release?

Thanks,
Nithin.


On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 12:10 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Charles,
>
> I didnt get a chance to work more on it but the sample shows that just
> changing beam version breaks existing code.
>
> Since Beam does not manage its dependency compatibility with runners -
> understand this as "it never managed this issue" - I guess you can proceed
> with 2.7 ignoring this breaking change. For > 2.7.0 versions, testing with
> the officially supported engine versions (kind of matrix compatibility) can
> be required with some advanced apps (with sides, unions, etc... maybe
> nextmark can be a start?).
>
> My blind guess is that 2.6 was compiled with spark 2.2.1 and 2.7 with
> spark 2.3.1 and therefore the method can have changed even if signature
> didn't (thanks scala and java method lookup which uses returned types vs
> signatures ignoring them).
> An interesting test would be to compile Beam 2.7.0 with spark 2.2.1 and
> run it with my project, I guess it would work.
>
> Side note: during my tests i realized that if you use avro 1.8 new API it
> fails in spark since only spark master was upgraded to avro 1.7 and not
> earlier versions so beam providing avro 1.8 is another issue.
>
> Anyway, fine to proceed on my side even if there is a "user regression",
> nobody being available to identify it would mean delaying the release of
> too much and beam is far to be only spark runner so no reason to block
> others ;).
>
> Le ven. 21 sept. 2018 03:32, Ahmet Altay <[email protected]> a écrit :
>
>> Good point. However, we agreed that our release policy would be to patch
>> only long term support (LTS) releases. Given that we have not made any LTS
>> releases yet, perhaps we should use 2.8.0 as the opportunity to make our
>> first LTS release.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 6:26 PM, Thomas Weise <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> That's not the same for a user though. 2.7.1 would be a patch compatible
>>> release that only fixes bugs. 2.8.0 adds new features and potentially also
>>> new issues..
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 3:16 PM Ahmet Altay <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1 to Thomas's suggestion. Instead of 2.7.1 we can follow up with 2.8.0
>>>> though. 2.8.0 has a release branch cut date of 10/10 according to our
>>>> release calendar.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 2:47 PM, Connell O'Callaghan <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +1 to Thomas's suggestion - if Charles or others cannot reproduce.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 2:40 PM Thomas Weise <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> We can also consider releasing 2.7.0 and then follow up with 2.7.1 if
>>>>>> the problem can be reproduced and requires a fix. Just food for thought 
>>>>>> :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 2:13 PM Charles Chen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My mistake, it looks like the correct beam staging repository (
>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1046/)
>>>>>>> is specified in your pom file.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 2:10 PM Charles Chen <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hey Romain and JB, do you have any progress on this?  One thing I
>>>>>>>> would like to point out is that 2.7.0 isn't yet pushed to Maven 
>>>>>>>> Central, so
>>>>>>>> referring to it by version is not expected to work (and it looks like 
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> is what is done in your repo:
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau/beam-2.7.0-fails).  Luke indicated
>>>>>>>> above that he doesn't see any dependency changes.  Can you isolate and
>>>>>>>> reproduce this problem so that we can develop a fix, if necessary?  I 
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> like to proceed with an RC2 as soon as possible.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 6:37 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <
>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Quick update on the spark issue: I didn't get enough time to
>>>>>>>>> identify it clearly but managed to have a passing run of my test 
>>>>>>>>> changing a
>>>>>>>>> bunch of versions.
>>>>>>>>> I suspect my code triggers some class conflicting between spark
>>>>>>>>> and my shade leading to a serialization issue. I didn't test
>>>>>>>>> userClassPathFirst option of spark but it can be an interesting thing 
>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> enable in beam runner.
>>>>>>>>> However it is still very confusing to have it not running just
>>>>>>>>> upgrading beam version and the spark error is very hard to understand.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>>>>>> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
>>>>>>>>> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>>>>>>>>> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github
>>>>>>>>> <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>>>>>>>>> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 à 20:17, Lukasz Cwik <[email protected]> a
>>>>>>>>> écrit :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Romain hinted that this was a dependency issue but when comparing
>>>>>>>>>> the two dependency trees I don't get much of a difference:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> lcwik@lcwik0: ~$ diff /tmp/260 /tmp/270
>>>>>>>>>> < [INFO] +- org.apache.beam:beam-runners-spark:jar:2.6.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> < [INFO] |  +-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-model-pipeline:jar:2.6.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> > [INFO] +- org.apache.beam:beam-runners-spark:jar:2.7.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> > [INFO] |  +-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-model-pipeline:jar:2.7.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> 5c6
>>>>>>>>>> < [INFO] |  +-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-sdks-java-core:jar:2.6.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> > [INFO] |  +-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-sdks-java-core:jar:2.7.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> 14,18c15,19
>>>>>>>>>> < [INFO] |  |  \- org.tukaani:xz:jar:1.5:compile
>>>>>>>>>> < [INFO] |  +-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-runners-core-construction-java:jar:2.6.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> < [INFO] |  |  \-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-model-job-management:jar:2.6.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> < [INFO] |  +-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-runners-core-java:jar:2.6.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> < [INFO] |  |  \-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-model-fn-execution:jar:2.6.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>> > [INFO] |  |  \- org.tukaani:xz:jar:1.8:compile
>>>>>>>>>> > [INFO] |  +-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-runners-core-construction-java:jar:2.7.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> > [INFO] |  |  \-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-model-job-management:jar:2.7.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> > [INFO] |  +-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-runners-core-java:jar:2.7.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>> > [INFO] |  |  \-
>>>>>>>>>> org.apache.beam:beam-model-fn-execution:jar:2.7.0:compile
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Other then Beam package changes, the only other change is xz
>>>>>>>>>> which I don't believe could be causing the issue.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 8:38 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, let me take a look.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>>> JB
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 18/09/2018 17:36, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> > Le mar. 18 sept. 2018 à 16:44, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     I don't have the issue ;)
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     As said in my vote, I tested 2.7.0 RC1 on beam-samples
>>>>>>>>>>> with Spark
>>>>>>>>>>> >     without problem.
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     I don't reproduce Romain issue as well.
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     @Romain can you provide some details to reproduce the
>>>>>>>>>>> issue ?
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> > Sure, you can use this
>>>>>>>>>>> > reproducer: https://github.com/rmannibucau/beam-2.7.0-fails
>>>>>>>>>>> > It shows that it suceeds on 2.6 and fails on 2.7.
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     Regards
>>>>>>>>>>> >     JB
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     On 17/09/2018 19:17, Charles Chen wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     > Luke, Maximillian, Raghu, can you please propose
>>>>>>>>>>> cherry-pick PRs
>>>>>>>>>>> >     to the
>>>>>>>>>>> >     > release-2.7.0 for your issues and add me as a reviewer
>>>>>>>>>>> >     (@charlesccychen)?
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     > Romain, JB: is there any way I can help with debugging
>>>>>>>>>>> the issue
>>>>>>>>>>> >     you're
>>>>>>>>>>> >     > facing so we can unblock the release?
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     > On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 1:49 PM Raghu Angadi <
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >     I would like propose one more cherrypick for RC2
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >     : https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6391
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >     This is a KafkaIO bug fix. Once a user hits this
>>>>>>>>>>> bug, there is no
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >     easy work around for them, especially on Dataflow.
>>>>>>>>>>> Only work
>>>>>>>>>>> >     around
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >     in Dataflow is to restart or reload the job.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >     The fix itself fairly safe and is tested.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >     Raghu.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >     On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:52 AM Alexey Romanenko
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >     <[email protected] <mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >         Perhaps it could help, but I run simple
>>>>>>>>>>> WordCount (built with
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >         Beam 2.7) on YARN/Spark (HDP Sandbox) cluster
>>>>>>>>>>> and it
>>>>>>>>>>> >     worked fine
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >         for me.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         On 14 Sep 2018, at 06:56, Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         <[email protected] <mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         Hi Charles,
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         I didn't get enough time to check deeply but it
>>>>>>>>>>> is clearly a
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         dependency issue and it is not in beam spark
>>>>>>>>>>> runner
>>>>>>>>>>> >     itself but
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         in another transitive module of beam. It does
>>>>>>>>>>> not happen in
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         existing spark test cause none of them are in a
>>>>>>>>>>> cluster (even
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         just with 1 worker) but this seems to be a
>>>>>>>>>>> regression since
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         2.6 works OOTB.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>
>>>>>>>>>>> |  Blog
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> | Github
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> |
>>>>>>>>>>> Book
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >      <
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         Le jeu. 13 sept. 2018 à 22:15, Charles Chen
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>         <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>             Romain and JB, can you please add the
>>>>>>>>>>> results of your
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>             investigations into the errors you've seen
>>>>>>>>>>> above?  Given
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>             that the existing SparkRunner tests pass
>>>>>>>>>>> for this RC, and
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>             that the integration test you ran is in
>>>>>>>>>>> another repo that
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>             is not continuously tested with Beam, it is
>>>>>>>>>>> not clear how
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>             we should move forward and whether this is
>>>>>>>>>>> a blocking
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>             issue, unless we can find a root cause in
>>>>>>>>>>> Beam.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>             On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 2:08 AM Etienne
>>>>>>>>>>> Chauchot
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>             <[email protected] <mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>                 Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>                 on a performance and functional
>>>>>>>>>>> regression stand
>>>>>>>>>>> >     point
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>                 I see no regression:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>                 I looked at nexmark graphs "output
>>>>>>>>>>> pcollection size"
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>                 and "execution time" around release cut
>>>>>>>>>>> date on
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>                 dataflow, spark, flink and direct
>>>>>>>>>>> runner in batch and
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>                 streaming modes. There seems to be no
>>>>>>>>>>> regression.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>                 Etienne
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>                 Le mardi 11 septembre 2018 à 12:25
>>>>>>>>>>> -0700, Charles
>>>>>>>>>>> >     Chen
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>                 a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>                 The SparkRunner validation test
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >      (here:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://beam.apache.org/contribute/release-guide/#run-validation-tests
>>>>>>>>>>> )
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>                 passes on my machine.  It looks like
>>>>>>>>>>> we are likely
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>                 missing test coverage where Romain is
>>>>>>>>>>> hitting
>>>>>>>>>>> >     issues.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>                 On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 12:15 PM Ahmet
>>>>>>>>>>> Altay
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>                 <[email protected] <mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>                 Could anyone else help with looking
>>>>>>>>>>> at these issues
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>                 earlier?
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>                 On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 12:03 PM,
>>>>>>>>>>> Romain
>>>>>>>>>>> >     Manni-Bucau
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>                 <[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>                 <mailto:[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>                 Im running this main [1] through
>>>>>>>>>>> this IT [2]. Was
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>                 working fine since ~1 year but 2.7.0
>>>>>>>>>>> broke it.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>                 Didnt investigate more but can have
>>>>>>>>>>> a look later
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>                 this month if it helps.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >      [1]
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/Talend/component-runtime/blob/master/component-runtime-beam/src/it/serialization-over-cluster/src/main/java/org/talend/sdk/component/beam/it/clusterserialization/Main.java
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >      [2]
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/Talend/component-runtime/blob/master/component-runtime-beam/src/it/serialization-over-cluster/src/test/java/org/talend/sdk/component/beam/it/SerializationOverClusterIT.java
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>                 Le mar. 11 sept. 2018 20:54, Charles
>>>>>>>>>>> Chen
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>                 <[email protected] <mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>                 Romain: can you give more details
>>>>>>>>>>> on the failure
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>                 you're encountering, i.e. how you
>>>>>>>>>>> are performing
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>                 this validation?
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>                 On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 9:36 AM
>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>                 Onofré <[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>                 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 weird, I didn't have it on Beam
>>>>>>>>>>> samples. Let me
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 try to reproduce and I
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 will create the Jira.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 Regards
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 JB
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 On 11/09/2018 11:44, Romain
>>>>>>>>>>> Manni-Bucau wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 > -1, seems spark integration is
>>>>>>>>>>> broken (tested
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 with spark 2.3.1 and 2.2.1):
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 > 18/09/11 11:33:29 WARN
>>>>>>>>>>> TaskSetManager: Lost
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 task 0.0 in stage 0.0 (TID 0,
>>>>>>>>>>> RMANNIBUCAU,
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 executor 0):
>>>>>>>>>>> java.lang.ClassCastException:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     cannot
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 assign instance of
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >      scala.collection.immutable.List$SerializationProxy to
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 fieldorg.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.org
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <http://fieldorg.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <
>>>>>>>>>>> http://fieldorg.apache.spark.rdd.rdd.org/>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <
>>>>>>>>>>> http://org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.org
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >      <http://org.apache.spark.rdd.rdd.org/
>>>>>>>>>>> >>$apache$spark$rdd$RDD$$dependencies_
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 of type scala.collection.Seq in
>>>>>>>>>>> instance of
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  org.apache.spark.rdd.MapPartitionsRDD
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >       at
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>   
>>>>>>>>>>> java.io.ObjectStreamClass$FieldReflector.setObjFieldValues(ObjectStreamClass.java:2233)
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 > Also the issue Lukasz identified
>>>>>>>>>>> is important
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 even if workarounds can be
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 > put in place so +1 to fix it as
>>>>>>>>>>> well if
>>>>>>>>>>> >     possible.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 > Romain Manni-Bucau
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 > @rmannibucau <
>>>>>>>>>>> https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 | Blog
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 > <
>>>>>>>>>>> https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 > <
>>>>>>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>>
>>>>>>>>>>> | Github
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 > <https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
>>>>>>>>>>> LinkedIn
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >      <
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 > Le lun. 10 sept. 2018 à 20:48,
>>>>>>>>>>> Lukasz Cwik
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <[email protected] <mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 > <mailto:[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <mailto:[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>>> a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >     I found an issue where we
>>>>>>>>>>> are no longer
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 packaging the pom.xml within
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >     the artifact jars at
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 META-INF/maven/groupId/artifactId.
>>>>>>>>>>> More details
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >     in
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-5351.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 I wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >     consider this a blocker but
>>>>>>>>>>> it was an
>>>>>>>>>>> >     easy fix
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >     (
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/6358)
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 and users may rely on the
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >     pom.xml.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >     Should we recut the release
>>>>>>>>>>> candidate to
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 include this?
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >     On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 4:58
>>>>>>>>>>> AM
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >     <[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <mailto:[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         +1 (binding)
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         Tested successfully on
>>>>>>>>>>> Beam Samples.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         Thanks !
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         Regards
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         JB
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         On 07/09/2018 23:56,
>>>>>>>>>>> Charles Chen
>>>>>>>>>>> >     wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > Please review and
>>>>>>>>>>> vote on the
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 release candidate #1 for the
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         version
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > 2.7.0, 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
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <http://dist.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <http://dist.apache.org/>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <http://dist.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <http://dist.apache.org/>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > <
>>>>>>>>>>> http://dist.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <http://dist.apache.org/>> [2],
>>>>>>>>>>> which is signed
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 with the key with
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > fingerprint
>>>>>>>>>>> 45C60AAAD115F560 [3],
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > * all artifacts to be
>>>>>>>>>>> deployed to
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 the Maven Central
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         Repository [4],
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > * source code tag
>>>>>>>>>>> "v2.7.0-RC1" [5],
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > * website pull
>>>>>>>>>>> request listing the
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 release and publishing the API
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > reference manual [6].
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > * Java artifacts were
>>>>>>>>>>> built with
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 Gradle 4.8 and OpenJDK
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          >
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.8.0_181-8u181-b13-1~deb9u1-b13.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > * Python artifacts
>>>>>>>>>>> are deployed
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 along with the source release
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         to the
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > dist.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <http://dist.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <http://dist.apache.org/>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <http://dist.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <http://dist.apache.org/>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         <http://dist.apache.org
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <http://dist.apache.org/>> [2].
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > The vote will be open
>>>>>>>>>>> for at least
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 72 hours. It is adopted by
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         majority
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > approval, with at
>>>>>>>>>>> least 3 PMC
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 affirmative votes.
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > Charles
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > [1]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12343654
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > [2]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >      https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.7.0
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > [3]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/KEYS
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > [4]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1046/
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > [5]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.7.0-RC1
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >          > [6]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/549
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         --
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <mailto:[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <mailto:[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <mailto:[email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <http://blog.nanthrax.net/>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >         Talend -
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.talend.com
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 <http://www.talend.com/>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>>>>                 >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     >
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>> >     --
>>>>>>>>>>> >     Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>>>>>>>>> >     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>>>>>>>>> >     http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>>>>>>>>> >     Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>>>>>>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>

Reply via email to