Just a reminder that for ASF releases we are voting on releasing the source, the binaries are simply a nice-to-have.
Nevertheless, this is the right call since the majority of users will use the binaries, not the source. As Steve pointed out, we don't want to release something broken, even if it is not contained in the source. We should make sure to notify the release manager when merging release-critical changes. -Max On 07.04.20 01:24, Robert Bradshaw wrote: > Thanks. It sounds like this is enough of a blocker for me to vote -1 > for RC1 as well. We'll keep an eye out for RC2. > > (If this is the only change, the Python artifacts are still good. I > would encourage folks to keep testing RC1 to see if there are any other > issues, so we can have quick resolution on RC2.) > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:53 PM Rui Wang <ruw...@google.com > <mailto:ruw...@google.com>> wrote: > > Ok, I will abort RC1 and go toward RC2 for known issues. Thanks > everyone who has helped! > > > > -Rui > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:28 PM Reuven Lax <re...@google.com > <mailto:re...@google.com>> wrote: > > -1, as that PR does fix a critical bug. The fact that no unit > test broke before was more a signal that our unit testing was > deficient in this area. > > My fix for the bug is pr/11226, which did include a unit test > (which fails without the fix). However it appears that 11252 > forked off just the main code files from my pr, and not the unit > test. If we're recutting, we should include the unit test as well. > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:11 PM Rui Wang <ruw...@google.com > <mailto:ruw...@google.com>> wrote: > > I see. I will also leave the community to decide. > > With the unit tests in [1], the fix becomes sufficient (e.g. > if the community decides that the fix is critical, I will > also need to include those tests in the release). > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11226 > > > -Rui > > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 3:05 PM Steve Niemitz > <sniem...@apache.org <mailto:sniem...@apache.org>> wrote: > > My opinion doesn't matter much, since we're just going > to cherry pick the fix into our fork anyways, but you're > essentially proposing releasing a build that *WILL* > cause data loss to anyone who uses processing time timers. > > I'll leave it up to the community to decide, but it > seems like a pretty big bug. > > Also, fwiw, there is a PR open that adds a test for this > [1], but it was never merged (it's been open for 12 days). > > [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11226 > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:52 PM Rui Wang > <ruw...@google.com <mailto:ruw...@google.com>> wrote: > > My opinion is, even though that commit was missing, > no test/validation gave a signal that something > relevant was broken. Plus that fix didn't include a > test. > > I will hesitate to say such a fix is critical for a > release, unless there is something to test or > validate it. > > > -Rui > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 2:46 PM Steve Niemitz > <sniem...@apache.org <mailto:sniem...@apache.org>> > wrote: > > timers are essentially broken without it, so I'd > say -1 > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:45 PM Rui Wang > <ruw...@google.com <mailto:ruw...@google.com>> > wrote: > > ok so the source is consistent with the > binary. What undecided is if missing that > commit is -1, or that can be marked as a > known issue in release note. > > > -Rui > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 2:38 PM Steve Niemitz > <sniem...@apache.org > <mailto:sniem...@apache.org>> wrote: > > I can confirm that the artifact on maven > central [1] does not have the change in > it either, I disassembled it with javap. > > [1] > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1100/org/apache/beam/beam-runners-core-java/2.20.0/beam-runners-core-java-2.20.0.jar > > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 5:28 PM Luke Cwik > <lc...@google.com > <mailto:lc...@google.com>> wrote: > > If the source doesn't represent the > binaries, should that be an > automatic -1? > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 2:08 PM > Valentyn Tymofieiev > <valen...@google.com > <mailto:valen...@google.com>> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 1:21 PM > Robert Bradshaw > <rober...@google.com > <mailto:rober...@google.com>> wrote: > > Valentyn, do the container > issues affect our external > containers as well? > > > No, external containers install > Beam, so all Beam dependencies > are also installed. > > Context (for others reading > this): Currently built > Dataflow Python containers don't > install one of Beam 2.20.0 > dependencies, which will be fixed. > > > I verified the signatures > and sources, they all look > good, except that we're > missing > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11252 > if we were hoping to get > that in. The wheel looks > fine as well. > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 12:16 > PM Rui Wang > <ruw...@google.com > <mailto:ruw...@google.com>> > wrote: > > A friendly ping to > remind the vote for RC1 > is pending. > > > > -Rui > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at > 7:21 AM Péter Farkas > <peter.far...@aliz.ai > <mailto:peter.far...@aliz.ai>> > wrote: > > +1 - Validated > only BEAM-9452 > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-9452> > > On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 > at 00:22, Ahmet > Altay > <al...@google.com > <mailto:al...@google.com>> > wrote: > > +1 - Validated > python > quickstart > examples. Thank > you for > preparing the RC. > > On Fri, Apr 3, > 2020 at 12:25 PM > Ismaël Mejía > <ieme...@gmail.com > > <mailto:ieme...@gmail.com>> > wrote: > > Can somebody > with windows > please > validate > this one: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-9452 > > We really > need to put > some windows > tests in > place in the > future. > Maybe we can > try github > actions for > this (but > well the > vote is not > the place to > discuss this). > > > I completely > agree with you. > I think we kind > of already > discussed this > > (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-9388) > but we did not > get a chance to > work on it. > > > > On Fri, Apr > 3, 2020 at > 8:16 PM Rui > Wang > <ruw...@google.com > > <mailto:ruw...@google.com>> > wrote: > > > > Add Maven > and Java > versions > that were > used for > building > java artifacts: > > maven: 3.6.2 > > java: > 1.8.0_181 > > > > > > -Rui > > > > On Thu, > Apr 2, 2020 > at 9:06 PM > Rui Wang > <ruw...@google.com > > <mailto:ruw...@google.com>> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi everyone, > >> Please > review and > vote on the > release > candidate #1 > for the > version > 1.20.0, 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> > [2], which > is signed > with the key > with > fingerprint > 699A 22D2 > D4F0 0AD3 > 957B 6A88 > 38B1 C6B4 > 25EB A67C [3], > >> * all > artifacts to > be deployed > to the Maven > Central > Repository [4], > >> * source > code tag > "v1.20.0-RC1" [5], > >> * website > pull request > listing the > release [6], > publishing > the API > reference > manual [7], > and the blog > post [8]. > >> * Java > artifacts > were built > with Maven > MAVEN_VERSION and > OpenJDK/Oracle > JDK JDK_VERSION. > >> TODO: do > these > versions > matter, and > are they > stamped into > the artifacts? > >> * Python > artifacts > are deployed > along with > the source > release to > the > dist.apache.org > > <http://dist.apache.org> > [2]. > >> * > Validation > sheet with a > tab for > 2.20.0 > release to > help with > validation [9]. > >> * Docker > images > published to > Docker Hub [10]. > >> > >> The vote > will be open > for at least > 72 hours. It > is adopted > by majority > approval, > with at > least 3 PMC > affirmative > votes. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Release > Manager > >> > >> [1] > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12319527&version=12346780 > >> [2] > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/beam/2.20.0/ > >> [3] > > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/beam/KEYS > >> [4] > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachebeam-1100/ > >> [5] > > https://github.com/apache/beam/tree/v2.20.0-RC1 > >> [6] > > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11285 > >> [7] > > https://github.com/apache/beam-site/pull/602 > >> [8] > > https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/11298 > >> [9] > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qk-N5vjXvbcEk68GjbkSZTR8AGqyNUM-oLFo_ZXBpJw/edit#gid=318600984 > >> [10] > > https://hub.docker.com/search?q=apache%2Fbeam&type=image > > > > -- > > Peter Farkas > > Lead Data Architect > > > www.aliz.ai > <http://www.aliz.ai/> > > LinkedIn > > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/alizcompany/>| > Facebook > > <https://www.facebook.com/aliztechnologies/>| > Blog > > <https://medium.com/@aliz_ai> > > <http://www.aliz.ai/> >
