Thanks Kenn, for identifying the issue. If no artifacts affected artifacts are published then we should be good. Let me know if we need to make any changes in 2.13.0
On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 10:53 AM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> wrote: > Just discovered a potentially serious issue that was present during this > RC: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-7493. So far I have not > discovered a truly user-facing impact, and example validation succeeded, > but I wanted to alert the list. > > Summary: When rendering a published pom.xml the dependencies are always > the path concatenated with dashes even when that is not the > correct artifactId. For example sdks/java/testing/test-utils are resolved > in the pom to beam-sdks-java-testing-test-utils. This does not exist; it > manually sets the name to beam-sdks-java-test-utils, omitting the > extraneous `testing` directory that exists only for taxonomy. > > There are a few other modules that manually set their archive name. From > what I can tell, each of these is either (a) not published or (b) not > depended upon. I am still checking. > > Kenn > > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 9:22 AM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: > >> +1 and I think all of that can be covered with JIRA. >> >> Irrespective the release manager still needs to pay attention to the >> communication on the VOTE thread. >> >> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 9:19 AM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote: >> >>> Checking that JIRA link sounds reasonable as long as we can agree that >>> it is single source of truth for cherry pick requests. I also agree with >>> Cham, requests need to come with a reason. >>> >>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 7:38 AM Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I don't think we need anything fancier or marking even as Blocker some >>>> of this stuff, would not be enough just to monitor that [1] has no >>>> issues? (of course if the interested party has not put the fix version >>>> to the current ongoing vote one this is a mistake). >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20BEAM%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20AND%20fixVersion%20%3D%202.13.0 >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 4:23 PM Chamikara Jayalath <chamik...@google.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 5:02 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> I would suggest have a single way of tracking cherry pick request to >>>> an RC. Currently we use emails on the RC thread, open PRs, and Jiras tagged >>>> for the release. This is confusing the person doing the release while they >>>> are juggling multiple things. How about we ask all cherry pick requests to >>>> have a JIRA filed against that release and marked as blockers? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > I agree with this and with what Ankur said. Release blockers should >>>> be more explicit and should come with a reason. After voting thread start, >>>> I would say this should include a mail to the voting thread as well as a >>>> blocking JIRA. Other PRs opened against the branch may or may not get >>>> merged at the discretion of the release manager. >>>> > >>>> > Thanks, >>>> > Cham >>>> > >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:05 PM Ankur Goenka <goe...@google.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> That makes sense. >>>> >>> I would also like to add that the corresponding PR should be added >>>> to an open blocking Jira for the release to keep a single source to check. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 12:15 PM Kenneth Knowles <k...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I would actually suggest that the following search needs to be >>>> triaged to zero before cutting an RC: >>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+base%3Arelease-2.13.0 >>>> . >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 11:17 AM Ankur Goenka <goe...@google.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Sorry, I missed the comment for not including weekend's to 72 >>>> hours voting period. >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> I meant to update the blog post >>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8667/files once we have finalized >>>> the RC so that it can be consistent. Please add any comments to PR and I >>>> can incorporate them. >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> As we did not go for 3rd RC and >>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8714 was not blocking the 2.13 >>>> release, I went with the release. >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> I have released the maven artifacts for beam. So I suppose, we >>>> can not do another RC for 2.13.0. >>>> >>>>> If we need anything urgently in 2.13 then we can do a bug fix >>>> release 2.13.1. >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 8:59 AM Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> This seems a rushed and things fall through the cracks. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Max had requested to not include the weekend into the voting >>>> period. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Valentyn: I had the same question on the first RC. The PR should >>>> be included into the vote for review. You can find it here: >>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8667/files >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> I had requested to include following backport PR before the RC: >>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8714 - It's not blocking but >>>> would be nice if someone can merge it for any future release from this >>>> branch. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>>>> Thomas >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:59 AM Maximilian Michels < >>>> m...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> The summary is not correct. Binding votes (in order): >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> Ahmet Altay >>>> >>>>>>> Robert Bradshaw >>>> >>>>>>> Maximilian Michels >>>> >>>>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>> >>>>>>> Lukasz Cwik >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> A total of 5 binding votes. >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> On 04.06.19 02:37, Ankur Goenka wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> > +1 >>>> >>>>>>> > Thanks for validating the release and voting. >>>> >>>>>>> > With 0(-1), 6(+1) and 3(+1 binding) votes, I am concluding >>>> the voting >>>> >>>>>>> > process. >>>> >>>>>>> > I am going ahead with the release and will keep the community >>>> posted >>>> >>>>>>> > with the updates. >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 1:57 PM Andrew Pilloud < >>>> apill...@google.com >>>> >>>>>>> > <mailto:apill...@google.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > +1 Reviewed the Nexmark java and SQL perfkit graphs, no >>>> obvious >>>> >>>>>>> > regressions over the previous release. >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 1:15 PM Lukasz Cwik < >>>> lc...@google.com >>>> >>>>>>> > <mailto:lc...@google.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > Thanks for the clarification. >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:40 AM Ankur Goenka < >>>> goe...@google.com >>>> >>>>>>> > <mailto:goe...@google.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > Yes, i meant i will close the voting at 5pm and >>>> start the >>>> >>>>>>> > release process. >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019, 10:59 AM Lukasz Cwik < >>>> lc...@google.com >>>> >>>>>>> > <mailto:lc...@google.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > Ankur, did you mean to say your going to >>>> close the vote >>>> >>>>>>> > today at 5pm? (and then complete the release >>>> afterwards) >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 10:54 AM Ankur Goenka >>>> >>>>>>> > <goe...@google.com <mailto:goe...@google.com>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > Thanks for validating and voting. >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > We have 4 binding votes. >>>> >>>>>>> > I will complete the release today 5PM. >>>> Please raise >>>> >>>>>>> > any concerns before that. >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > Thanks, >>>> >>>>>>> > Ankur >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:36 AM Lukasz Cwik >>>> >>>>>>> > <lc...@google.com <mailto: >>>> lc...@google.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > Since the gearpump issue has been >>>> ongoing since >>>> >>>>>>> > 2.10, I can't consider it a blocker >>>> for this >>>> >>>>>>> > release and am voting +1. >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 7:13 AM >>>> Jean-Baptiste >>>> >>>>>>> > Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net >>>> >>>>>>> > <mailto:j...@nanthrax.net>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > +1 (binding) >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > Quickly tested on beam-samples. >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > Regards >>>> >>>>>>> > JB >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > On 31/05/2019 04:52, Ankur Goenka >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> > > Hi everyone, >>>> >>>>>>> > > >>>> >>>>>>> > > Please review and vote on the >>>> release >>>> >>>>>>> > candidate #2 for the version >>>> >>>>>>> > > 2.13.0, 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> [2], >>>> which is >>>> >>>>>>> > signed with the key with >>>> >>>>>>> > > fingerprint >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> 6356C1A9F089B0FA3DE8753688934A6699985948 [3], >>>> >>>>>>> > > * all artifacts to be deployed >>>> to the >>>> >>>>>>> > Maven Central Repository [4], >>>> >>>>>>> > > * source code tag >>>> "v2.13.0-RC2" [5], >>>> >>>>>>> > > * website pull request listing >>>> the >>>> >>>>>>> > release [6] and publishing the API >>>> >>>>>>> > > reference manual [7]. >>>> >>>>>>> > > * Python artifacts are >>>> deployed along >>>> >>>>>>> > with the source release to the >>>> >>>>>>> > > dist.apache.org < >>>> http://dist.apache.org> >>>> >>>>>>> > <http://dist.apache.org> [2]. >>>> >>>>>>> > > * Validation sheet with a tab >>>> for 2.13.0 >>>> >>>>>>> > release to help with validation >>>> >>>>>>> > > [8]. >>>> >>>>>>> > > >>>> >>>>>>> > > The vote will be open for at >>>> least 72 >>>> >>>>>>> > hours. It is adopted by majority >>>> >>>>>>> > > approval, with at least 3 PMC >>>> affirmative >>>> >>>>>>> > votes. >>>> >>>>>>> > > >>>> >>>>>>> > > Thanks, >>>> >>>>>>> > > Ankur >>>> >>>>>>> > > >>>> >>>>>>> > > [1] >>>> >>>>>>> > > >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> https://jira.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12345166 >>>> >>>>>>> > > [2] >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.13.0/ >>>> >>>>>>> > > [3] >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS >>>> >>>>>>> > > [4] >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1070/ >>>> >>>>>>> > > [5] >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.13.0-RC2 >>>> >>>>>>> > > [6] >>>> https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/8645 >>>> >>>>>>> > > [7] >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/589 >>>> >>>>>>> > > [8] >>>> >>>>>>> > > >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qk-N5vjXvbcEk68GjbkSZTR8AGqyNUM-oLFo_ZXBpJw/edit#gid=1031196952 >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>>>>> > -- >>>> >>>>>>> > Jean-Baptiste Onofré >>>> >>>>>>> > jbono...@apache.org <mailto: >>>> jbono...@apache.org> >>>> >>>>>>> > http://blog.nanthrax.net >>>> >>>>>>> > Talend - http://www.talend.com >>>> >>>>>>> > >>>> >>>
