+1 (ipmc 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)
P.S.: you can keep the dev@ vote as long as you need to verify the technical part of the release, the single format requirement is that it should be open _at least_ 72 hours. On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Ismaël Mejía <ieme...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > - verified signatures + checksums > - run mvn clean verify -Prelease, all artifacts build and the tests run > smoothly > > A new 0.4.1 release to include the BigQuery fix is a good idea, I think as > we approach graduation it is important that we define (if we haven't, > probably I just don't know) what issues are release blockers for future > releases and which issues can be fixed as minor patch versions. > > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:02 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > > > Thanks for the update Dan. > > > > I think we should move forward on this release as, as you said, we have > > important improvements compared to 0.3.0-incubating release. > > We can do a 0.4.1-incubating pretty soon to address the bigquery IO > > issues. I'm volunteer to do that. > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > > > On 12/19/2016 09:21 PM, Dan Halperin wrote: > > > >> I vetted the binary artifacts accompanying the release by running > several > >> jobs on the Dataflow and Direct runners. At a high level, the release > >> looks > >> fine -- I ran some of my favorite jobs and they all worked swimmingly. > >> > >> There are some severe bugs in BigQueryIO in the release. Specifically, > we > >> broke the ability to write to BigQuery using different tables for every > >> window. To a large degree, this makes BigQuery useless when working with > >> unbounded data (streaming pipelines). The bugs have been fixed (and > >> accompanying tests added) in PRs #1651 and #1400. > >> > >> Conclusion: +0.8 > >> > >> * 0.4.0-incubating RC3 is largely an improvement over 0.3.0-incubating, > >> especially in the user getting started experience. > >> * The bugs in BigQueryIO are blockers for BigQuery users, but this is > >> likely a relatively small fraction of the Beam community. I would not > >> retract RC3 based on this alone. Unless we plan to cut an RC4 for other > >> reasons, we should move forward with RC3. > >> > >> I'd hope that we hear from key users of the Apex, Flink, and Spark > runners > >> before closing the vote, even though it's technically been 72+ hours. I > >> suggest we wait to ensure they have an opportunity to chime in. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Dan > >> > >> > >> Appendix: pom.xml changes to use binary releases from Apache Staging: > >> > >> <repositories> > >> <repository> > >> <id>apache.staging</id> > >> <name>Apache Development Staging Repository</name> > >> <url>https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/staging/ > >> </url> > >> <releases> > >> <enabled>true</enabled> > >> </releases> > >> <snapshots> > >> <enabled>false</enabled> > >> </snapshots> > >> </repository> > >> </repositories> > >> > >> On Sun, Dec 18, 2016 at 10:14 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net > > > >> wrote: > >> > >> Hi guys, > >>> > >>> The good thing is that my issue to access repository.apache.org Nexus > is > >>> now fixed. > >>> > >>> To update the signature files, we have to drop the Nexus repository to > >>> stage a new one, > >>> meaning cancel the current vote to do a new RC4. > >>> > >>> I can do that, up to you. > >>> > >>> Anyway, regarding the release content, +1 (binding). > >>> > >>> Regards > >>> JB > >>> > >>> > >>> On 12/18/2016 06:56 PM, Davor Bonaci wrote: > >>> > >>> Indeed -- I did help JB with the release ever so slightly, due to the > >>>> networking connectivity issue reaching repository.apache.org, which > JB > >>>> further described and is tracked in INFRA-13086 [1]. This is not > >>>> Beam-specific. > >>>> > >>>> The current signature shouldn't be a problem at all, but, since others > >>>> are > >>>> asking about it, I think it would be the best to simply re-sign the > >>>> source > >>>> .zip archive and continuing this vote. JB, what do you think? > >>>> > >>>> Regarding the release itself, I think we need to keep raising the > >>>> quality > >>>> and maturity release-over-release, and test signals are an excellent > way > >>>> to > >>>> demonstrate that. Due to the recent upgrades to Jenkins, usage of the > >>>> DSL, > >>>> etc. (thanks INFRA and Jason Kuster), we can now, for the first time, > >>>> formally show that the release candidate clearly passes all Jenkins > >>>> suites > >>>> that we have: > >>>> * All unit tests across the project, plus example ITs across all > runners > >>>> [2], [3]. > >>>> * All integration tests on the Apex runner [4]. > >>>> * All integration tests on the Flink runner [5]. > >>>> * All integration tests on the Spark runner [6]. > >>>> * All integration tests on the Dataflow runner [7]. > >>>> > >>>> That said, I know of a few issues/regressions in the areas that are > not > >>>> well tested today. I think Dan Halperin has more context, so I'll let > >>>> him > >>>> speak of the details, and quote relevant JIRA issues. > >>>> > >>>> With the known issues in 0.3.0-incubating, such as trouble running > >>>> examples > >>>> out-of-the-box, I think this release candidate is a clear win. Of > >>>> course, > >>>> that may change if more issues are discovered. > >>>> > >>>> For me, this release candidate is +1 (at this time), contingent upon > no > >>>> known major issues affecting Apex, Flink and Spark runners. > >>>> > >>>> Davor > >>>> > >>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13086 > >>>> [2] > >>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Beam/job/beam_PreCommit_Java_ > >>>> MavenInstall/5994/ > >>>> [3] > >>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Beam/job/beam_PostCommit_Java > >>>> _MavenInstall/2116/ > >>>> [4] > >>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Beam/job/beam_PostCommit_Java > >>>> _RunnableOnService_Apex/10/ > >>>> [5] > >>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Beam/job/beam_PostCommit_Java > >>>> _RunnableOnService_Flink/1120/ > >>>> [6] > >>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Beam/job/beam_PostCommit_Java > >>>> _RunnableOnService_Spark/430/ > >>>> [7] > >>>> https://builds.apache.org/view/Beam/job/beam_PostCommit_Java > >>>> _RunnableOnService_Dataflow/1830/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Kenneth Knowles > <k...@google.com.invalid > >>>> > > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> +1, as long as it is fine for the release to be signed by a PMC member > >>>> > >>>>> other than the release manager. Otherwise need to replace the .asc > >>>>> file. > >>>>> > >>>>> Following [Apache release checklist]( > >>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#check-list > ): > >>>>> > >>>>> 1.1 Verified checksums & signature (Davor's) > >>>>> 2.1 Ran unit tests and integration tests > >>>>> 3.1 DISCLAIMER is correct > >>>>> 3.2 LICENSE & NOTICE are correct > >>>>> 3.3 Files have license headers (RAT & checkstyle) > >>>>> 3.4 Provenance is clear > >>>>> 3.5 Dependencies license are legal (RAT) [2] > >>>>> 3.6 Release contains source code, no binaries > >>>>> > >>>>> Additionally: > >>>>> > >>>>> - Went over the generated javadoc (filed tickets but no release > >>>>> blockers) > >>>>> - Went over the generated release notes > >>>>> - Sanity checked the Maven Central artifacts > >>>>> - Confirmed that the git tag matches > >>>>> - Checked the website PR > >>>>> > >>>>> I heartily agree that the components would give much better context > on > >>>>> tickets. Even with that, our JIRA titles could use a lot of > >>>>> improvement. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 5:06 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > j...@nanthrax.net > >>>>> > > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi everyone, > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Please review and vote on the release candidate #3 for the version > >>>>>> 0.4.0-incubating, 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], > >>>>>> * all artifacts to be deployed to the Maven Central Repository [3], > >>>>>> * source code tag "v0.4.0-incubating-RC3" [4], > >>>>>> * website pull request listing the release and publishing the API > >>>>>> > >>>>>> reference > >>>>> > >>>>> manual [5]. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. It is adopted by > majority > >>>>>> approval, with at least 3 PPMC affirmative votes. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> Regards > >>>>>> JB > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?proje > >>>>>> ctId=12319527&version=12338590 > >>>>>> [2] https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/beam/0.4.0- > >>>>>> incubating/ > >>>>>> [3] https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache > >>>>>> > >>>>>> beam-1008/ > >>>>> > >>>>> [4] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-beam.git > >>>>>> ;a=tag;h=112e38e4a68b07e6bf4916d1bdcc7ecaca8bbbd4 > >>>>>> [5] https://github.com/apache/incubator-beam-site/pull/109 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> -- > >>> 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 > > > -- Sergio Fernández Partner Technology Manager Redlink GmbH m: +43 6602747925 <+43%20660%202747925> e: sergio.fernan...@redlink.co w: http://redlink.co
